Why doesn't Firaxis tell us what they plan on doing with the game?

[lschnarch]

http://www.firaxis.com/jobs/openings.php


Could Firaxis be serious about fixing Civ 5?

If these positions were offered all for Civ5 and taking the list of responsibilites into account, it would mean that Civ5 is regarded as a complete failure in its current state.

 

[_hero_]

Which they should have done; else not made a sequel. Why would anyone make a mediocre sequel to one of the best strategy games ever made, unless it was just to fleece one more cash in?

Pathetic excuse for corporate putrescence, further demonstrated by that tasteless image they send in response to the email.

I disagree with this logic. Just because something isn't as good as the previous version does not mean it's worthless. I have watched plenty of sequels to movies that were not as good as the first movie. But they were still good and I still enjoyed them. You feel like because you spent $50 on Civ IV and got a great deal, that spending $50 on Civ V would only be worth it if you got an even better deal. If they had called the game something else and pretended like it wasn't a continuation of the Civ series, and people had played it with no expectations and got as many hours out of it as they had it would have been a better deal than most games that get played through once and never played again.

They made a demo, they gave us gameplay videos, and you had message boards to read peoples descriptions of the game. No one put a gun to your head and made you buy the game. You have no one to blame but yourself if you are unhappy that you did. They made a product and gave us the resources to decide whether or not we liked it before buying it and we still did. Blaming corporate greed is just not taking responsibility for your lack of patience and poor decision making. It's not their fault that we were dumb enough to buy a game that was getting poor reviews and that had a demo for us to play.

 

[nokmirt]

They are focusing now to that facebook game.
Civ5 wont see anything too crucial anymore.
Enjoy from it like it is.

Not true I am certain of that!

 

[War_Pig]

Because there's no point in doing so since everyone will just tell them they're aren't doing enough to fix the game or they're making it worse or more whining.

Going with this. No matter what they say is coming down the pipe there will be people to point out how bad it will be and that they need to do more (this is the internet after all).

 

[Pouakai]

People seem to forget cIV was like this pre-patches.

 

[lschnarch]

If they had called the game something else and pretended like it wasn't a continuation of the Civ series, and people had played it with no expectations and got as many hours out of it as they had it would have been a better deal than most games that get played through once and never played again.

They wouldn't have sold a tenth of what they have sold if they wouldn't have called this game Civilization V.
And even the tenth of people to buy it would have been split as the current fanbase - some would have liked it, others would have regarded it as weak and shallow.

The fact is, they have advertised it as Civilization V, a name which it doesn't deserve.
The fact is, they have claimed it to be designed to please the hardcore (Civilization) fans, too.
The fact is, the game doesn't hold almost any promise made (based on the the brand name "Civilization") prior to release.

The fact is, without this brand name attached to it, you wouldn't find it neither at Amazon, nor Steam, nor anywhere else now.
The fact is, this game is weak even on its own "merits".
The fact is, for being named a "Civilization" game, it is an insult to the paying customer.

 

[blind biker]

People seem to forget cIV was like this pre-patches.

At least for me, it wasn't. There were problems, but I enjoyed the game. I certainly didn't feel like poking my eyes out with chopsticks, like I did when I played Civ V.

 

[Tatran]

...it's a dead game and the 'old' folks have gone back to civ 4 or 3.

I went back to SMAC, 12 years old, but still superior compared to civ5.

 

[GrayingGamer]

They don't have a plan.Just random balance changes and new crappy overpriced DLC.

I was browsing steam the other day and my jaw dropped at all the stupid DLC. Cracked me up. I so want my money back (from the original purchase, as if I'd waste any on DLC...) for this thing.

 

[esemjay]

They don't have a plan.Just random balance changes and new crappy overpriced DLC.

You know this as a fact or an assessment?

 

[digitalAngst]

Why doesn't Firaxis tell us what they plan on doing with the game?

Perhaps because they don't plan on doing anything?

• They have your money.
• CiV's still on Steam's best-selling list
• People will buy Civ 6 or a Civ 5 expansion no matter what.
• Every patch they released lead to more whining instead of less.

So, why should they care again?

°dA, happily playing Civ5.

 

[MkLh]

Perhaps because they don't plan on doing anything?

• They have your money.
• CiV's still on Steam's best-selling list

• 
  
  Although the number of players playing it daily seems to be going down.
  
  

  [*]People will buy Civ 6 or a Civ 5 expansion no matter what.

  
  Not sure about that. How many would buy an expansion to CivRev if it would come out today? That game is simply dead, even for those who initially liked it. When Civ5 came out, Civ4 was still fresh in memories of players and many still played it, but when or if Civ6 will come out, Civ5 has been forgotten for years. It will certainly affect its sales. Games with a short life cycle may sell well in short term, but selling expansions and sequels for them is much harder.

 

[Disgustipated]

People seem to forget cIV was like this pre-patches.

I actually finished a game of civ4 (bought it 1 week after release), I have yet to finish my first game of civ5 (8 hours played). Civ4 I played continuously after release. I didn't have any bugs with that game. Not that civ5 is buggy either. I haven't run into any civ5 bugs. It just isn't fun. At least not for builders like me.

 

[PrAyTeLLa]

They made a demo, they gave us gameplay videos, and you had message boards to read peoples descriptions of the game. No one put a gun to your head and made you buy the game. You have no one to blame but yourself if you are unhappy that you did. They made a product and gave us the resources to decide whether or not we liked it before buying it and we still did. Blaming corporate greed is just not taking responsibility for your lack of patience and poor decision making. It's not their fault that we were dumb enough to buy a game that was getting poor reviews and that had a demo for us to play.

You forget that the demo was delayed until the game was released. The gameplay videos were explained as media-builds, and were obviously shown in the best light possible. A lot of the video chit chat would have been promises of this and that (sources tbc) which clearly turned out to be marketing b.s. And I really don't think you can claim reviews should have warned us. Which reviews were you reading? Most of the ones I recall look like paid advertising in hindsight. It is defiantly their fault for us being dumb enough to trust in them as they put their claims on public record. Reading some of the quotes in favorite quotes thead, while without context, are very misleading to the final product.

 

[JosEPh_II]

Many CIV IV players never left IV. The Mod community is still producing new mods and still working on long standing Mods.

We didn't buy V because of many reasons. My personal reason was Steam, then followed by the changes to combat. If V was released Without the Steam attachment I "might" give it a try. Maybe.

JosEPh

 

[_hero_]

You forget that the demo was delayed until the game was released. The gameplay videos were explained as media-builds, and were obviously shown in the best light possible. A lot of the video chit chat would have been promises of this and that (sources tbc) which clearly turned out to be marketing b.s. And I really don't think you can claim reviews should have warned us. Which reviews were you reading? Most of the ones I recall look like paid advertising in hindsight. It is defiantly their fault for us being dumb enough to trust in them as they put their claims on public record. Reading some of the quotes in favorite quotes thead, while without context, are very misleading to the final product.

So what? Did anyone put a gun to your head and make you buy the game the day it came out?

No they didn't. Take accountability for the fact that you all were impatient and decided you'd rather spend $50 now than wait a few days and try the demo and see if it was really worth it to you. 2k didn't force anyone to buy a game and by giving you a demo within the first two weeks of release, anyone who actually valued that $50 enough to see if it was worth it would have known.

If you are unhappy with Civ V it is because you were impatient and made a poor choice. 2K made a product and marketed it and sold it. They gave you the ability to test it for free which is more than most companies in general do. If anything, relative to most companies, 2K is more customer friendly. Giving demos, patching/ attempting to fix a product for free, and actually sending community reps on the internet if only occasionally, is still more than most companies do.

The sheer lack of perspective on this topic is baffling to me. Never have I seen such severe universal overreaction on the internet and that is saying something.

 

[blind biker]

So what? Did anyone put a gun to your head and make you buy the game the day it came out?

No they didn't. Take accountability for the fact that you all were impatient and decided you'd rather spend $50 now than wait a few days and try the demo and see if it was really worth it to you. 2k didn't force anyone to buy a game and by giving you a demo within the first two weeks of release, anyone who actually valued that $50 enough to see if it was worth it would have known.

If you are unhappy with Civ V it is because you were impatient and made a poor choice. 2K made a product and marketed it and sold it. They gave you the ability to test it for free which is more than most companies in general do. If anything, relative to most companies, 2K is more customer friendly. Giving demos, patching/ attempting to fix a product for free, and actually sending community reps on the internet if only occasionally, is still more than most companies do.

The sheer lack of perspective on this topic is baffling to me. Never have I seen such severe universal overreaction on the internet and that is saying something.

Allowing you to play the demo for only 100 turns is equivalent to misleading. Both the gameplay problems as well as the crashes become evident after about 200 turns.

 

[ohioastronomy]

So what? Did anyone put a gun to your head and make you buy the game the day it came out?

No they didn't. Take accountability for the fact that you all were impatient and decided you'd rather spend $50 now than wait a few days and try the demo and see if it was really worth it to you. 2k didn't force anyone to buy a game and by giving you a demo within the first two weeks of release, anyone who actually valued that $50 enough to see if it was worth it would have known.

If you are unhappy with Civ V it is because you were impatient and made a poor choice. 2K made a product and marketed it and sold it. They gave you the ability to test it for free which is more than most companies in general do. If anything, relative to most companies, 2K is more customer friendly. Giving demos, patching/ attempting to fix a product for free, and actually sending community reps on the internet if only occasionally, is still more than most companies do.

The sheer lack of perspective on this topic is baffling to me. Never have I seen such severe universal overreaction on the internet and that is saying something.

You haven't been around long on the net then Seriously, this is mild. Look up what happened in Star Wars Galaxies with their New Gaming Experience. Or MOO3, if those forums are still around.

A lot of us trusted the company to do a good job with a known franchise. They disappointed many of us, and we no longer have that implicit trust. The sentence above has nothing to do with the presence, or absence, of a demo.

As far as the excuse that we're not seeing patches because people on the internet are being mean to them.....(eye roll)....come on. I have more respect for them than that, and in any case they chose to ignore the fan sites and post minimal information on the official one. I lay the blame for the tone squarely at their feet; they could have managed their enthusiasts a whole lot better.

 

[weenarz1176]

They wouldn't have sold a tenth of what they have sold if they wouldn't have called this game Civilization V.
And even the tenth of people to buy it would have been split as the current fanbase - some would have liked it, others would have regarded it as weak and shallow.

The fact is, they have advertised it as Civilization V, a name which it doesn't deserve.
The fact is, they have claimed it to be designed to please the hardcore (Civilization) fans, too.
The fact is, the game doesn't hold almost any promise made (based on the the brand name "Civilization") prior to release.

The fact is, without this brand name attached to it, you wouldn't find it neither at Amazon, nor Steam, nor anywhere else now.
The fact is, this game is weak even on its own "merits".
The fact is, for being named a "Civilization" game, it is an insult to the paying customer.

FYI - THESE ARE NOT FACTS. I hate to break it to you - YOU DO NOT POST FACTS.

 

[ImperialGuard]

They gave you the ability to test it for free which is more than most companies in general do.

If anything, relative to most companies, 2K is more customer friendly.

Giving demos, patching/ attempting to fix a product for free, and actually sending community reps on the internet if only occasionally, is still more than most companies do.

Do you work for 2K ?

Possibly in the new "internet forum marketing department"?

I hear that 2K does this more than most companies do.
Moderator Action: Such accusations are not allowed in this forum.