Why doesn't Civ V come with more scenarios?

[blac]

I actually enjoy playing them, it gives me a break from the a normal game. ALL other forms of strategy games come with a campaign, so why doesn't civ V? I realize most people just end up playing the main game, but other games, all come with campaigns. I don't understand why they couldn't have just include 5 or so scenarios to play instead of charging us money for them, via DLC.

I realize a campaign in the tradition sense doesn't really work with civ, but there is no reason why they can't offer a couple of scenario maps like, Rome, or Mesopotamia, or whatever.

 

[Save_Ferris]

I think the GOTY edition will have some. So if you don't like the Mongols, you'll have to pay for extras. Or you could get mods.

 

[blac]

Yeah, I normally go for mods, although I find them to be kinda buggy sometimes.

 

[buchengshi]

ALL other forms of strategy games come with a campaign, so why doesn't civ V?

Civ can generate random maps, so why don't "ALL other forms of strategy games".

 

[blac]

Well, they normally come with a large number of maps. In Civ you have to generate maps or else you will know where all the resources are...

 

[baldfalk]

You missed his point

I think Civ is really meant to be more of a sandbox game, as opposed to, say, Railroad Tycoon 2 which was very, very heavily scenario/campaign-based.

There definitely is a sore lack of scenarios with the game out of the box though. I think half of it really has to do with game balance being in flux (...Mongol scenario in any 2011 patch, oh God) but hopefully we'll see what happens.

This is a little bit of devil's advocate but I actually really enjoyed the New World scenario - it was like two different courses each with several toppings. It's just kinda sad that Firaxis caved in and subscribed to the micro-serving DLC model instead of the larger expansion packs of the past.

 

[jtb1127]

I think its because our friends at firaxis wanted to make the most expensive game possible by doing as little work as possible. So really all that meant was just having nice and friendly graphics to attract console gamers and then leaving out any other features. But then they'll just sell it later for $5 when it should have came with the game in the first place.

 

[baldfalk]

Eh, I wouldn't go that far. Civ 5 may be simplified in many, many regards, but it's not SM's Railroads!

Now THAT game was a disappointing punctuation mark to an amazing series.

 

[Necrotaur]

I would have liked to see scenarios like the WW2/Greek Empire ones in Civ2. Some of my fondest memories are taking the puny Neutrals and making them a powerhouse capable of challenging Nazi Germany.

For Civ 5, I was very surprised that in New World you don't start with a ready-made civilization and the map is a weird giant island instead of N/S America. Maybe I'm missing something?

Paradise Found and the Mongol one are pretty decent though.

 

[baldfalk]

I liked the Mongol scenario as well, except it seemed like it was tuned for a completely different game on the higher difficulties.

(edit: which it was, in a way, yes I'm aware of the balance changes especially w.r.t Horsemen)

 

[Revoran]

I think its because our friends at firaxis wanted to make the most expensive game possible by doing as little work as possible. So really all that meant was just having nice and friendly graphics to attract console gamers and then leaving out any other features. But then they'll just sell it later for $5 when it should have came with the game in the first place.

This is somewhat true of all game companies (who would try to be as efficient as possible when creating a game). On the other hand there's no way you could possibly know that and you're just being pretentious. However I wouldn't be surprised if some civs were not quite ready when the game was released and so they decided to release them as DLC instead.

 

[Celtic Warrior]

The best Civ scenario that came with a game was Civ2 WW2. No other retail scenario has matched that so I generally stick to random map games.

 

[blac]

The best Civ scenario that came with a game was Civ2 WW2. No other retail scenario has matched that so I generally stick to random map games.

Thats so true, I played that one so many times

 

[Revoran]

Why not invest some time and make a scenario? Hell I just created a South East Asia map that would be perfect for a Vietnam War scenario. All you need to do is learn to use the world builder (a free download in Steam, look for Side Mier's Civilization V SDK) - it's not nearly as time intensive as mod making.

I personally have a huge size earth map (Shigg's Earth with a fair amount of modification) with an enlarged Europe, Britain and Japan. I use it for TSL 22civ games, but you could make a ww2 or ww3 scenario. It also has accurate resource placement (ie, Ivory in Africa and South Asia, Wine in Europe and the near east, even down to coal and uranium deposits worldwide).

I also have an atlantic map which is in my sig - perfect for an age of exploration/colonization scenario. The world (literally) is your oyster.

But you can only have pearls if you are in the carribean, african coast, south asia or oceania...

IMO the Spain/Inca scenario was somewhat lacking in quality and seemed rushed; while the Mongol Scenario was good and the Polynesia scenario was very polished but I didn't find it as fun as the Mongol Scenario.

 

[blac]

I also have an atlantic map which is in my sig - perfect for an age of exploration/colonization scenario. The world (literally) is your oyster.

I've actually been fooling around with the map maker myself. I'm awful at it, I've created my own Atlantic map though, actually, just of the maritime provinces since its where I'm from.

Its a fun tool but I have no idea how to create complex scenarios like the Mongol one

 

[Solo4114]

I actually enjoy playing them, it gives me a break from the a normal game. ALL other forms of strategy games come with a campaign, so why doesn't civ V? I realize most people just end up playing the main game, but other games, all come with campaigns. I don't understand why they couldn't have just include 5 or so scenarios to play instead of charging us money for them, via DLC.

I realize a campaign in the tradition sense doesn't really work with civ, but there is no reason why they can't offer a couple of scenario maps like, Rome, or Mesopotamia, or whatever.

Because Firaxis probably did not think they'd see much return on the investment it'd be to develop scenarios.

Or, to put it more simply, because the devs are cheap.



In some sense, I can't say I blame them. I've almost never played any scenario longer than a few turns, and that's been true since the introduction of scenarios. I think I tried the Viking one for Warlords once, and I played a few turns of WW2 for Civ 2 and Earth 1000 AD for Civ 4. That's about it, really. Even the heavily modded games like Final Frontier for Civ 4 BTS didn't really hold my attention that well.

To me, scenarios typically rely on very "gamey" conventions. "Capture these chests and bring them back to your capital! Bring back 40 chests, and you are teh winnar!11!" or whatever. At best, they highlight what I perceive as major drawbacks in the Civ approach to gaming -- IE: the WW2 scenario which burns through years so quickly that you could find yourself still fighting the war in 1963 (which, to me, highlights problems in the game's scale).

My own tastes aside, however, I know there ARE folks who like 'em, and they've included at least a few basic ones in every game since Civ 2, so my bet is "They were to cheap," really. If you look at a lot of the "Fresh out of the box" design for the rest of the game, this seems pretty evident. Wonder movies, anyone? Victory movies maybe? Animated tiles? Nah. Costs too much, doesn't give you as much bang for your buck.

 

[Alexastor]

I would have liked to see scenarios like the WW2/Greek Empire ones in Civ2. Some of my fondest memories are taking the puny Neutrals and making them a powerhouse capable of challenging Nazi Germany.

For Civ 5, I was very surprised that in New World you don't start with a ready-made civilization and the map is a weird giant island instead of N/S America. Maybe I'm missing something?

Paradise Found and the Mongol one are pretty decent though.

North America in this scenario is random so it plays out different every time you start a new game.

I would have liked to play on an accourate version, too, though. At least they supplied both a random and an accurate version for Paradise Found (which I can't play because it crashes, unfortunately )

 

[Revoran]

I've actually been fooling around with the map maker myself. I'm awful at it, I've created my own Atlantic map though, actually, just of the maritime provinces since its where I'm from.

Its a fun tool but I have no idea how to create complex scenarios like the Mongol one

The "Scenario Editor" in the worldbuilder allows you to re name civs and leaders (but not add or remove new city states weirdly), set relationships at the start of your scenario, place units (units in the worldbuilder) and cities (cities tab) with buildings etc, edit players policies, edit whether they are playable, place tile improvements (done via the plopper) etc etc.

For actual earth location maps, I often trace a map i've found on the internet, get the worldbuilder to a comfortable actual size on the screen (ie zoomed out far enough) and then basically use my mouse to trace underneath the piece of paper which i am holding against the screen - drawing the map in the exact shape of the map i had traced earlier.

 

[baldfalk]

North America in this scenario is random so it plays out different every time you start a new game.

I would have liked to play on an accourate version, too, though. At least they supplied both a random and an accurate version for Paradise Found (which I can't play because it crashes, unfortunately )

Big problem is European start would always be off-scale compared to America just due to how the starting capitals are (required to be) set up.

I guess they could at least have tried, though. Oh well.

 

[slobberinbear]

Because Firaxis probably did not think they'd see much return on the investment it'd be to develop scenarios.

Or, to put it more simply, because the devs are cheap.



In some sense, I can't say I blame them. I've almost never played any scenario longer than a few turns, and that's been true since the introduction of scenarios. I think I tried the Viking one for Warlords once, and I played a few turns of WW2 for Civ 2 and Earth 1000 AD for Civ 4. That's about it, really. Even the heavily modded games like Final Frontier for Civ 4 BTS didn't really hold my attention that well.

To me, scenarios typically rely on very "gamey" conventions. "Capture these chests and bring them back to your capital! Bring back 40 chests, and you are teh winnar!11!" or whatever. At best, they highlight what I perceive as major drawbacks in the Civ approach to gaming -- IE: the WW2 scenario which burns through years so quickly that you could find yourself still fighting the war in 1963 (which, to me, highlights problems in the game's scale).

My own tastes aside, however, I know there ARE folks who like 'em, and they've included at least a few basic ones in every game since Civ 2, so my bet is "They were to cheap," really. If you look at a lot of the "Fresh out of the box" design for the rest of the game, this seems pretty evident. Wonder movies, anyone? Victory movies maybe? Animated tiles? Nah. Costs too much, doesn't give you as much bang for your buck.

These are all fair points. There are only so many development bucks to be spread around. I suppose my gripe would be that the bucks were not adequately spent playtesting ... the horseman exploit kept me away from the game. If I hadn't randomly fired up the game and gotten the patch, I may never have come back.

At any rate, I did tinker with most of the scenarios in civ III and IV, but their absence would not have mattered, to me anyway.

I think the one scenario that would certainly get played a lot is Earth/huge, with accurate starting locations and appropriate/balanced resources. That one HAD to be in there, and it wasn't.