Why isn't this game more popular?
- Thread starter JtW
- Start date
uhu
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2018
- Messages
- 156
I know and agree, now in a better place than originally;
meant now: just one more notch further.
It is also a question of visibility. Once I read thick paper manuals before even starting a program, looked first for the manageably sized number of adjustable parameters etc. ; probably today many players expect (nearly) instant usability.
True, the problem actually is the other game generally being way too easy and in natural unconscious comparison OldWorld's entry level / default should perhaps be asymmetrically lower than now, giving more room for working your way up from there (if you desire).
Suppose overall less frustration and, as said, those seeking a harder game a more fit to shape the game to their needs.
meant now: just one more notch further.
It is also a question of visibility. Once I read thick paper manuals before even starting a program, looked first for the manageably sized number of adjustable parameters etc. ; probably today many players expect (nearly) instant usability.
True, the problem actually is the other game generally being way too easy and in natural unconscious comparison OldWorld's entry level / default should perhaps be asymmetrically lower than now, giving more room for working your way up from there (if you desire).
Suppose overall less frustration and, as said, those seeking a harder game a more fit to shape the game to their needs.
Last edited:
Ita Bear
Warlord
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2020
- Messages
- 289
Hello folks,
I think there's a few factors at play here. I think Old World is very much aimed that the "old" Civ crowd. I bet a large portion of the player-base are 30-40 somethings who look back fondly on the old Civ days. Old World is definitely a more 'hardcore' type of strategy game, whereas recent iterations of Civ has tended more to the (hate to use the term but it's true) casual crowd. Mistakes in Old World get punished and many people these days don't appreciate that.
Social media is also a factor. Games get popular these days on social media like reddit but Old World isn't very Reddit friendly. There aren't any memes forced into the game, there aren't any crazy yields ("yield porn") and the AI won't often do something laughably bad, since it's rather good. The game's player-base are also less likely to use social media and spread the word because of their age, I think.
I'm not complaining, though. I like the smaller appeal of Old World and very much appreciate it's made by 4X fans for 4X fans.
Kind regards,
Ita Bear
I think there's a few factors at play here. I think Old World is very much aimed that the "old" Civ crowd. I bet a large portion of the player-base are 30-40 somethings who look back fondly on the old Civ days. Old World is definitely a more 'hardcore' type of strategy game, whereas recent iterations of Civ has tended more to the (hate to use the term but it's true) casual crowd. Mistakes in Old World get punished and many people these days don't appreciate that.
Social media is also a factor. Games get popular these days on social media like reddit but Old World isn't very Reddit friendly. There aren't any memes forced into the game, there aren't any crazy yields ("yield porn") and the AI won't often do something laughably bad, since it's rather good. The game's player-base are also less likely to use social media and spread the word because of their age, I think.
I'm not complaining, though. I like the smaller appeal of Old World and very much appreciate it's made by 4X fans for 4X fans.
Kind regards,
Ita Bear
I'm not sure about that, we have a bunch of events that seem to be quite the meme content to me!
Now that's hilariously true. It's not just the age, it's the personality as well, I think. Social media isn't only used by young people but I'm pretty sure our player base is more likely to have people who avoid social media. Even on the dev team, we're quite a few people with no social media at all (including myself).
InsidiousMage
Emperor
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2021
- Messages
- 1,058
I think the difference would be that the presentation in OW is, for lack of a better word, somber enough that the memes don't read as memes the way they would in another game. To me anyway.
Speaking of memes, the potential is there. CK3 crazy events got shared a lot.
And here's just from my last two games in OW:
- I played Hittites, and once the first ruler died, his grandson became king (because the Hittite king forewent his sons, I think it's a hardcoded thing). One of these snubbed uncles couldn't let it be. He ended up murdering both the king and his son and heir, leaving only a one year old daughter alive – and managed to install himself as a regent, so he became my next character.
- in a game with Rome, I had an array of religion heads who were all drunks. Also, my father who was a general started a rebellion against me. I imprisoned him and he died in a prison mutiny.
Maybe this is what we lack? An After-Action Report forum? CK AARs are insanely popular among the player base. Some people spend more time reading them than actually playing.
And here's just from my last two games in OW:
- I played Hittites, and once the first ruler died, his grandson became king (because the Hittite king forewent his sons, I think it's a hardcoded thing). One of these snubbed uncles couldn't let it be. He ended up murdering both the king and his son and heir, leaving only a one year old daughter alive – and managed to install himself as a regent, so he became my next character.
- in a game with Rome, I had an array of religion heads who were all drunks. Also, my father who was a general started a rebellion against me. I imprisoned him and he died in a prison mutiny.
Maybe this is what we lack? An After-Action Report forum? CK AARs are insanely popular among the player base. Some people spend more time reading them than actually playing.
Last edited:
Forster
Prince
I think the age spread may be a little more than 30 - 40. I'm 75.
I do agree about the social media. I don't use facebook, twitter, reddit and more of them. I don't like discord, it is too confusing to me. I do visit game forums on my pc.
I have to scale back my positive assessment a little bit. After spending more time in the late game, AI turns take tons of time once the map is full of cities and units.We can "fix" that for you.
I'm another one for whom CFC is as close to social media as I get, unless you count LinkedIn for career purposes. I rather intentionally extricated myself from it in the 2010s.
Between the general social media posts and Solver's comment, I think there's an element of "building the game we want to play", even if that isn't the most mass-market game, and there's nothing wrong with that, as long as it's sustainable anyhow. It can be a good way to get a fanatical following over time, even if the speed of awareness of the game spreading is more at 1999 speeds than 2019 speeds.
Moreso, it would be boring if every game targeted the mass market. That was kind of where we seemed to be heading in the mid-2000s, prior to online distribution taking off, back when magazines were writing, "is PC gaming dead?" Soren was writing Civilization IV that all the strategy gamers were happy with, but it was pretty much that, Age of Empires III, GalCiv2, and some Slitherine titles to choose from. I like that today there are way more strategy - and non-strategy - games to try than I have time to try.
I'm also reminded of Factorio, another game that doesn't cater to the widest audience, but has found its audience is plenty big nonetheless. Or Euro Truck Simulator 2, which found that there are a surprisingly large number of people in the world who want to drive a simulated truck, whether they drive a truck in real life or not. Both of them have been "long tail" games, with Factorio selling about half a million copies per year, year after year, and ETS2 continuing to sell but also being sustained by expansions. Not that it was always easy for them, Factorio nearly ran out of money early on before it found its audience.
tl;dr: Let's appreciate that Mohawk is making games for the more strategy-focused audience we are part of!
Between the general social media posts and Solver's comment, I think there's an element of "building the game we want to play", even if that isn't the most mass-market game, and there's nothing wrong with that, as long as it's sustainable anyhow. It can be a good way to get a fanatical following over time, even if the speed of awareness of the game spreading is more at 1999 speeds than 2019 speeds.
Moreso, it would be boring if every game targeted the mass market. That was kind of where we seemed to be heading in the mid-2000s, prior to online distribution taking off, back when magazines were writing, "is PC gaming dead?" Soren was writing Civilization IV that all the strategy gamers were happy with, but it was pretty much that, Age of Empires III, GalCiv2, and some Slitherine titles to choose from. I like that today there are way more strategy - and non-strategy - games to try than I have time to try.
I'm also reminded of Factorio, another game that doesn't cater to the widest audience, but has found its audience is plenty big nonetheless. Or Euro Truck Simulator 2, which found that there are a surprisingly large number of people in the world who want to drive a simulated truck, whether they drive a truck in real life or not. Both of them have been "long tail" games, with Factorio selling about half a million copies per year, year after year, and ETS2 continuing to sell but also being sustained by expansions. Not that it was always easy for them, Factorio nearly ran out of money early on before it found its audience.
tl;dr: Let's appreciate that Mohawk is making games for the more strategy-focused audience we are part of!
- Joined
- May 5, 2005
- Messages
- 8,875
I don´t like the graphical presentation of the game, that was introduced with Civ IV. So may be all strategy gamers were happy with Civ IV, but me.
CornPlanter
Emperor
Please keep it that way tho
Casworon
Prince
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2014
- Messages
- 548
Great to hear the game is going well. I've also been a bit worried and feel the game deserves more recognition and succsess.
Part of me wonders if its the theme.
I wonder if the game would have had more success if it had gone fantasy or sci-fi.
The game mechanics are definitely there
Part of me wonders if its the theme.
I wonder if the game would have had more success if it had gone fantasy or sci-fi.
The game mechanics are definitely there
E.man
Prince
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2021
- Messages
- 555
Coming from Civ VI recently I'm not liking it.
Playing on a 22" laptop there's a mass of tiny details too hard to see easily.
If I fall behind it's hard to work out how to catch up.
Way too many tiny details.
Hard to figure out how to achieve these 'projects ' that come up that I'm supposed to achieve. What to research to get the requirements?
Pretty non plussed.
Playing on a 22" laptop there's a mass of tiny details too hard to see easily.
If I fall behind it's hard to work out how to catch up.
Way too many tiny details.
Hard to figure out how to achieve these 'projects ' that come up that I'm supposed to achieve. What to research to get the requirements?
Pretty non plussed.
InsidiousMage
Emperor
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2021
- Messages
- 1,058
CK3 has a much, much larger playerbase than CK2, especially if you count the player count for CK2 before it went free. That is a success.
Lowering the price would get some more players, but would it generate more revenue?
I think Mohawk is smart to pursue the "long tail" approach. The Steam review count in the past month indicates Old World is continuing to sell at a fairly steady pace. And they can still move that lever if that starts to slow down. But once you start moving that sale lever, you rapidly devalue the willingness of the public to buy your game at full price. Civ VI has sales all the time. Does anyone buy it at full price nowadays? If Old World had a 75% off sale, I'm sure it would bring in a burst of revenue that month, but it might cost quite a bit over the long term. So far they've had 25% sales, enough to incentivize a purchase but not enough to significantly discourage full-price sales.
Mohawk charged $30 for Offworld Trading Company when they were really new back in 2016, as another data point, and it did well enough that they're still around.
Or put another way, part of the sales challenge is price, and part is visibility/awareness. Without enough of the latter, lowering the price isn't going to work out well. I suspect that's the larger challenge.
I think Mohawk is smart to pursue the "long tail" approach. The Steam review count in the past month indicates Old World is continuing to sell at a fairly steady pace. And they can still move that lever if that starts to slow down. But once you start moving that sale lever, you rapidly devalue the willingness of the public to buy your game at full price. Civ VI has sales all the time. Does anyone buy it at full price nowadays? If Old World had a 75% off sale, I'm sure it would bring in a burst of revenue that month, but it might cost quite a bit over the long term. So far they've had 25% sales, enough to incentivize a purchase but not enough to significantly discourage full-price sales.
Mohawk charged $30 for Offworld Trading Company when they were really new back in 2016, as another data point, and it did well enough that they're still around.
Or put another way, part of the sales challenge is price, and part is visibility/awareness. Without enough of the latter, lowering the price isn't going to work out well. I suspect that's the larger challenge.
Similar threads
