Why is Firaxis so silent?

[Sonereal]

Am I the only one who is rather annoyed by that? I'm currently in the beta for Endless Space 2 and the developers of that game are very open about what they are doing, they have a public road map, and they actually talk to people. I also enjoy Battleborn which had massive issues too, and again, the developers there were and are quite open about these issues and their plans to address them.

Haven't read the rest of the thread, but I do want to say that the devs for ES2 are ridiculously close to the community and has a long history of being so. Firaxis, kinda, but not nearly as much.

Paradox is also pretty communicative, releasing weekly developer diaries talking about what they're working in all their games.

The community interaction between Firaxis and Civilization's community right now and their interaction with the XCOM 2 community is night and day.

 

[Abraxis]

They were never shy to 'share' so many youtube videos up to the point where they released this game. Smart game on their side, maybe.

Maybe not so smart in the long run as there are some real big issues to deal with.

Are you talking about the pre-release promotional material? Because it looked to me like Ed and that other guy weren't just shy, but terrified to be in-front of that camera.

 

[ThERat]

Because it looked to me like Ed and that other guy weren't just shy, but terrified to be in-front of that camera.

Maybe they were terrified knowing how brain dead the AI is

 

[Abraxis]

No it's because they are awkward nerds with no aptitude for community interaction. Exactly why they should be kept out of the spotlight and just left to work.

But yes, braindead AI, terrible game, it's that simple, they're so dumb and you're so smart for seeing it. I'm sure some of the others here at least had a point, and have constructive intentions, even if misguided. Yours is just backseat driving without a license, and I'm sure you're not just worried about your personal safety.

 

[RealAntithesis]

By now I hope it's obvious why Firaxis might not want to get involved in these discussions.

I don't think that's covers the key issue people are talking about here. The main concern is that Firaxis isn't communicating at all. I don't think people are expecting Firaxis to engage in full-on debates about the intricacies of Civ 6 mechanics and balance or give a daily update on what they had for breakfast - but rather some indication of a roadmap for future patches and recognition of issues that are being looked at.

So far, there's been nothing, apart from two patches over as many months which didn't address any of the key issues being complained about ad nauseum by the community (even those key issues that are perceived to be fairly simple fixes).

Dead silence is the thing leading to rampant speculation and accusations that Firaxis doesn't care etc etc.

 

[RealAntithesis]

Something else motivates you and it's not Firaxis' job to try and solve it.

I can only speak from personal experience, but I actually want Civ 6 to be a good game. This is one of the few games I purchased in recent memory at full price.

But I'm not being immersed in the game as I did with previous titles since I'm constantly fighting the UI, the AI wasn't presenting an enjoyable challenge, weird things kept on happening that made no sense (science tree beelining, upgrade issues with strategic resources etc), the look and feel of the game was too cluttered and I found myself staring at the map trying to figure out what the heck I was looking at, and I was getting bogged down in micromanagement detail much of which I felt was unnecessary and a lot which could have been streamlined relatively easily if only a reasonable amount of thought and effort was put into it during development.

All these issues detract from the game experience and result in something that becomes unenjoyable (depending on someone's tolerance for this sort of thing), so it's not unreasonable for people to want to know what Firaxis intends doing about them.

For me at least, I'm speaking up because I don't want my fully priced purchase from being a mistake. I don't think that's unreasonable. While Firaxis may be a software developer with millions of customers, I think it's still reasonable to expect them to maintain some sort of relationship with their customers.

 

[Abraxis]

Right, we all want it to be a better game. How does getting information about future patches result in us getting a better game? It doesn't, at all. Being interested is fine, but requiring information? Even expecting them to be obligated to give it to you? No, I'm sorry, no. It doesn't add up.

What does add up is wanting a thing, not knowing how to get it, and lashing out under false pretenses.

Anyways, they'll inform us when the final patch ships. Until then assume they're patching each issue as they figure out its solution. It's simple and that's really all you need to know in so far as having realistic expectations is concerned. You don't have to do anything, and there is nothing you can do.
But, if you really want to be pro-active about it, well, your only realistic avenue is modding the game yourself.

Or just focus on complaining about how the game disappointed you, whatever, that's fine too. But you have to stop acting like it's all in the name of making the game better. And you have to stop believing they're doing something wrong by not pandering to this non-sense.

 

[RealAntithesis]

How does getting information about future patches result in us getting a better game? It doesn't, at all. Being interested is fine, but requiring information?

It may result in the criticism becoming less strident. The current level of criticism can't be very good from the public relations point of view. Patches that seemingly don't address the key issues and lack of communication regarding recognised issues and a roadmap for future patches cause people to lose hope that the game will ever be fixed. This then results in significant negative publicity, low user review scores and loss of future revenue as people abandon the franchise.

So it should be in the developer's best interests to at least give the appearance of caring what their fans (at least the vocal ones) think.

 

[RealAntithesis]

Anyways, they'll inform us when the final patch ships. Until then assume they're patching each issue as they figure out its solution.

We don't actually know this, because they haven't said what they are recognising as issues - for all we know, even the most critical issues that have been discussed many times on these forums may not even be recognised by Firaxis as something worth looking into.

It's like attempting to strike up a conversation with someone who steadfastly ignores you and continues to do whatever they are doing without any indication they even know you exist.

It's simple and that's really all you need to know in so far as having realistic expectations is concerned. You don't have to do anything, and there is nothing you can do.

We bought the game. It's this little thing called customer support, which some companies see some value in providing.

 

[Abraxis]

It's like attempting to strike up a conversation with someone who steadfastly ignores you and continues to do whatever they are doing without any indication they even know you exist.

I think you should start leaving these poor people alone. I hope you don't go around acting as though not wanting to talk to you is a crime, and bad for their image. It sounds to me like they're doing the right thing. They've got one up on me.

 

[Magil]

Paradox is also pretty communicative, releasing weekly developer diaries talking about what they're working in all their games.

I've been playing Stellaris while waiting for Civ VI to finally get around to releasing the full set of modding tools/SDK/workshop support. I must say, it's quite astounding to see a developer tweeting screenshots from their upcoming build every few days, with detailed write-ups coming weekly in the form of developer diaries.

Meanwhile, Firaxis posts on reddit advertising their stream, and adding "While I don't have any new development information to share with you right now..." It's quite... interesting, to put it mildly.

 

[Battlehelm043]

I've been playing Stellaris while waiting for Civ VI to finally get around to releasing the full set of modding tools/SDK/workshop support. I must say, it's quite astounding to see a developer tweeting screenshots from their upcoming build every few days, with detailed write-ups coming weekly in the form of developer diaries.

Meanwhile, Firaxis posts on reddit advertising their stream, and adding "While I don't have any new development information to share with you right now..." It's quite... interesting, to put it mildly.

I agree, it would be nice for Firaxis to do something in a similar fashion. I'm just hopeful they have gone silent to focus on updates that are needed for the game to thrive even more than it is at the moment. Stellaris is great as is HOI4 I've been doing the same when I have time.

 

[Leyrann]

No, that's what you'd like to see, and obviously others here, but you have to understand you're wrong. At least from where they're sitting, which is all that matters.

I'd prefer they ignore you and all these other people, not worry about getting involved with, and managing public perception. Focus on solving the problems they can fix without worrying about sticking to some silly road map created just to placate people for no good reason either by someone who doesn't understand the problems, or doesn't understand the people. To inevitable disaster in either case.

Better to just have never gotten involved with that in the first place.

I'm confused what's happened that has suddenly made this behaviour an issue. Firaxis is an old company, they have been operating this way for a long time, and we should know exactly what to expect at this point.

Of course the answer is these needs aren't actually motivated by the desire to be playing good games, or making good games. If that were the case you'd all be doing one of those things instead of being here complaining about games. Something else motivates you and it's not Firaxis' job to try and solve it. Thankfully, I expect they understand this.

Making a road map is extremely easy though. No doubt they'll have meetings discussing their goals with the game; otherwise their developers can't start fixing the issues. In any meeting, there will be action points decided upon (for example: "Person A will improve the AI when sieging walled cities"). Then, you simply make a road map that mentions all action points (though of course you change it to, for example, "We wish to improve the AI's ability to take walled cities"). You don't even need to set a date, you can even specify that it might not happen next patch or even within a few months. But in ten minutes work, you tell the people what you're working on, and then they know that the AI is bad, and it might take a while before it improves, but it's being worked on. That's enough, at least for me. And I think it's enough for most people. I am only asking for one thing, and that is the knowledge that Firaxis is aware of the issues I have with the game (preferrably all of them of course, but even if it's only some of them that will help), and that they're working on fixing it.

No it's because they are awkward nerds with no aptitude for community interaction. Exactly why they should be kept out of the spotlight and just left to work.

But yes, braindead AI, terrible game, it's that simple, they're so dumb and you're so smart for seeing it. I'm sure some of the others here at least had a point, and have constructive intentions, even if misguided. Yours is just backseat driving without a license, and I'm sure you're not just worried about your personal safety.

You can't even recognize a joke when it's slapping you in the face.

 

[Zuizgond]

Right, we all want it to be a better game. How does getting information about future patches result in us getting a better game? It doesn't, at all. Being interested is fine, but requiring information? Even expecting them to be obligated to give it to you? No, I'm sorry, no. It doesn't add up.

What does add up is wanting a thing, not knowing how to get it, and lashing out under false pretenses.

Anyways, they'll inform us when the final patch ships. Until then assume they're patching each issue as they figure out its solution. It's simple and that's really all you need to know in so far as having realistic expectations is concerned. You don't have to do anything, and there is nothing you can do.
But, if you really want to be pro-active about it, well, your only realistic avenue is modding the game yourself.

Or just focus on complaining about how the game disappointed you, whatever, that's fine too. But you have to stop acting like it's all in the name of making the game better. And you have to stop believing they're doing something wrong by not pandering to this non-sense.

So you buy a game at full price which still has a lot of bugs and broken mechanisms after 3 months and you don't understand why people would like to know when these things will be fixed? And you say we should start leaving these poor people alone? I guess it's the developer syndrome again.

 

[Gorbles]

There's a difference between "I would like to know when these would be fixed" and "oh my god why are firaxis so incompetent my unborn grandchild could program a better game".

The difference (beyond tone) is the constructive nature of the statements involved. And we've seen a lot more of the latter, really.

 

[youngsteve]

I've been playing Stellaris while waiting for Civ VI to finally get around to releasing the full set of modding tools/SDK/workshop support. I must say, it's quite astounding to see a developer tweeting screenshots from their upcoming build every few days, with detailed write-ups coming weekly in the form of developer diaries.

Meanwhile, Firaxis posts on reddit advertising their stream, and adding "While I don't have any new development information to share with you right now..." It's quite... interesting, to put it mildly.

Paradox have always been like this & is one of their strong points. I have played their games for many years, & are quite shocked when trying other games, how poor their communication is compared to them. Firaxis take note.

 

[ThERat]

The difference (beyond tone) is the constructive nature of the statements involved. And we've seen a lot more of the latter, really.

When dealing with anything on the net, one should learn to selectively ignore such stuff. As if there has ever been any forum where everyone is civil. I read reddit and they talk a lot more aggressive about Firaxis. civfanatics are pretty tame.

 

[Gorbles]

When dealing with anything on the net, one should learn to selectively ignore such stuff. As if there has ever been any forum where everyone is civil. I read reddit and they talk a lot more aggressive about Firaxis. civfanatics are pretty tame.

Not always possible. Everyone has different levels of tolerance for personal insults (for entirely valid reasons), "get thicker skin" is not the solution here. Put the blame where it's deserved, instead of excusing bad attitudes.

You can be a vocal, constant critic of Firaxis and not resort to being an ass. And if you are an ass, or defend peoples' rights to be an ass, then I will simply defend the right for said asses to be ignored completely. I certainly as a developer wouldn't want to visit a forum where the primary form of interaction is accusing me of being bad at my job. I don't need that stress, and I can imagine other developers don't either.

This therefore leads to me defending the "silence" that people complain about. But only because people like you are moving the blame from the intolence non-constructive posters onto Firaxis.

I like the moderation here, it does well. But it can't be everywhere, all the time, and non-constructive opinions will still remain as a contributing cause as to why developers don't engage with their fanbase. That said, I think it's mainly developer workload. Usually the case. The developers that remain communicative are usually working overtime, or are permanently in crunch. Neither of which is healthy for them or their families, and neither of which should be incentivised as "the way to work" as a developer (sadly, the industry has problems with this).

 

[Falk]

You can be a vocal, constant critic of Firaxis and not resort to being an ass. And if you are an ass, or defend peoples' rights to be an ass, then I will simply defend the right for said asses to be ignored completely. I certainly as a developer wouldn't want to visit a forum where the primary form of interaction is accusing me of being bad at my job. I don't need that stress, and I can imagine other developers don't either.

You're missing the point though. The devs don't need to visit a forum and get yelled at to communicate with the community. They could just release official statements via some forum or the homepage or whatever platform they prefer.

I agree completely agree with you that it could potentially be a rather awful experience for the devs to engage in discussions with fans on an online platform, and that it is absoluetely understandable if they choose not to risk that. But this has absolutely nothing to do with my wish for the devs to communicate more with us. Not visiting forums is not the same things as being silent. You can ignore all the discussions and still be communicative. You are not actually defending the dev's silence, you're defending their staying away from online discussions. It's not the same thing.

Many publishers and developers are doing what I wish Firaxis would do - telling their fans about the development process post-release. So I don't get why we are having meta-discussions here.

 

[Gorbles]

You're missing the point t
hough. The devs don't need to visit a forum and get yelled at to communicate with the community. They could just release official statements via some forum or the homepage or whatever platform they prefer.

I agree completely agree with you that it could potentially be a rather awful experience for the devs to engage in discussions with fans on an online platform, and that it is absoluetely understandable if they choose not to risk that. But this has absolutely nothing to do with my wish for the devs to communicate more with us. Not visiting forums is not the same things as being silent. You can ignore all the discussions and still be communicative. You are not actually defending the dev's silence, you're defending their staying away from online discussions. It's not the same thing.

Many publishers and developers are doing what I wish Firaxis would do - telling their fans about the development process post-release. So I don't get why we are having meta-discussions here.

The problem with your comments, here, is that you're taking my response to someone else - who was talking about the dissatisfaction about the state of the product and how people give that feedback (on the forums) - and replacing it with your desire for more communication.

I was never arguing against more communication. But analysing that is a whole other topic, and is likely to never change because marketing schedules will be dictated by 2K, and Firaxis will have nothing to do with it. Even if Firaxis wanted to, they likely couldn't.

Other developers, other publishers, might do something differently. But that doesn't mean that 2K are going to automatically match this behaviour. There will be consequences for both (in the case of increased communication, it's both the pressure of maintaining that communication and the costs of doing so. You miss a week, people complain why, etc).

It also doesn't actually prevent complaints, either. I follow an indie game, Maia, that has frequent updates and frequent updates about those updates on the Steam forums and the developer's site. And yet if the game is left for a week, there will still be threads about a lack of updates. This is a singular, anecdotal example, but unfortunately to justify the investment required to increase developer communications, you need to make a solid business case for it. Examples like this will be used to argue against that allocation of budget (by others who want that budget), and so on.