Discussion in 'CivBE - General Discussions' started by lamaros, Oct 30, 2014.
i am using a mod, that shows the quest rewards for the buildings
They are bad because they're filler material that inevitably gets repetitive after you've seen it... twice. This goes beyond Civ BE and into Endless Legend as well, even though the main quest for each faction in that game is better than anything BE offers.
In the long run, it only shortens the player interest in the game due to repetition, unless its extremely minor, to the point of being irrelevant, like in Civ IV.
Done that way, as a flavor thing its fine, potentially good, but if you do it BE style - as a way too fill up deficiencies in core gameplay, it becomes an intrusive annoyance.
I'm pretty sure quests are the stopgap answer to the problem of players having too little to do due to Civ V slowing expansion and production rates (because of 1UPT). This was probably revealed in testing so they started throwing things in to keep the player clicking on something.
Its essentially contrary to strategic gameplay (evidenced by the lack of any such thing in competitive strategy games), the point of which is the player's ability to set his own goals and fulfill them, rather than have the computer do it for him.
the information for the quests should be in the civilpedia, for those who want to know about them before hand... I have no problem with that, and since the information is not there, it is a problem...
just wanted to thank you for making this mod.
I understand if it won't be added to the main game by firaxis and i think it would break some of the immersion if they did, but like infoaddicts, I consider this one of those really 'key' mods.
You just didn't really find the really good quests yet and think all quests are like this, right? There's some extremely powerful quests hidden behind some buildings and knowing these quests can make or break a match.
The quests should be part of the building description. We're not playing some obscure RPG here with stuff hidden all over the world, we're playing a 4X game, some of us in a competitive multiplayer environment and we like planning ahead.
You didn't demolish anything, all you did was repeating the stuff that shows that you have a very narrow view of how the game can/should be played. Some players are just FINE with not being able to make all the informed decisions in their first games. And after that it becomes less of an issue anyway.
It's funny, because you think you're the main demographic. Simple truth is: Most players never got further than Emporer in Civ 5. Most players won't really care about the information. Most people don't see it as puzzle that must be solved as fast as possible, they just play it as an empire-builder and have fun while doing so. So no, there's nothing indefensible about that. If you want more information, there is now a mod that adds all the quest bonuses to the tooltips.
And btw, look how many subscriber it has. About 1000.
Last route button in red:
...was uploaded 3 days earlier and has 11000 subscribers.
Visually distinctive terrains:
Uploaded a day after the tooltip-mod - has 3600 subscribers.
Siege range increase:
Uploaded 2 days earlier - has 3000 subscribers.
So a mod that modifies the range of siege units does better than the mod that advances the Tooltips. Most people just don't care.
Well, there are a few really strong quests, but with a few exceptions all of them are no-brainers. I know I probably want to build a fence rather early, get the autoplant for the free trade route and time my free tech right, but quests that give a real, meaningful decision? Very few.
Yeah, again: What keeps you from writing down the quest rewards, looking them up in external sources or - and yeah, that's not possible at the moment but should be - look them up in the Civilopedia. "Some of you" play competitive multiplayer, sure, key point of the argument: Most of you don't.
Look, when you play civ, are you pressing random buttons? No? Then you are trying to make informed decisions. So actually, everyone is in "my demographic," including you, even though you will refuse to recognize that. Even if the typical player is so apathetic so as to not care about game quality for it's own sake (as they should be, as they can go play any other game until this game is patched), that is no excuse for the developer, who existentially should care about making a quality game. There are only a few axiomatic principles that all games should aspire to uphold. An intuitive and informative UI is one of them.
Again, there is no way that any quality game should ever *force* a player to use external resources just to make basic decisions.
You should NEVER have to write down anything from game to game.
The fact that this stuff isn't even documented is terrible
If the actual quest rewards aren't in the tooltip there should be at the absolute Minimum part of the tooltip that says quest rewards are available in the civilopedia (and they should actually be available there)
The point is the game should not make information complicated to find out.
The developer makes a game for his audience. If his audience likes not to have all the information or just doesn't care about having all the information, then there's no reason to put all the information into the games UI. You spend a lot of time explaining what a game should and should not be like without ever explaining why that is the case. Who if not the majority of the games audience decides what a game "should" look like? Where do you draw these conclusions from? Sounds like you're just giving your opinion but making it sound like those were facts.
I'm sorry, but if you really think there has EVER been a game that had more than 3 rules and was able to be played "perfectly" without using external sources to fuel your knowledge, then... I really don't know in what kind of delusional world you live. Also, getting building for their quests are surely not "basic decisions". That's advanced strategy. And your answer doesn't even make sense - I already SAID that these information should be available in the Civilopedia ingame.
Out of interest: Let's say BE included random events that have great influence on the gameplay. Would you want them all documented, too? Or is it just because they're tied to buildings and can be used as a strategy element later on? Because honestly, for the first few matches I still don't understand why you wouldn't just see them as random events. You can't make an informed decision if you don't know that random event X could occur and interfere with your plans either, or could you? The lines you draw seem heavily artificial to me.
I don't know about you, but when I started gaming in 1993 or something, having pen and paper lying next to me was a given for many games. ^^ Sure, games have evolved, but still today, what's so bad about writing down stuff? I do that all the time when I'm playing a game for the first time.
But yeah, sure. They should put it in the Civilopedia. Still don't like the tooltip-stuff though.
As in you don't like tooltips in general?
ie your tiles and cities don't display yields, so you just tell your city to build a clinic and 'its done when its done'...if you want to know build times then check the civpedia and pull out a calculator.
The issue is the UI should make potentially useful information easy to find.
If you want to ignore it and play blind, then put the tooltip delay on 10 seconds.
While I don't necessarily disagree that it would be nice to have the quests available to read somewhere, I understand why they aren't. There is a balancing act of gameplay immersion and strategy.
You shouldn't want something totally at either extreme.
For example, using your logic I could argue that we should see all of the player modifiers ( for example in CiV Alexander was extremely agressive and competitive).
I liked having that information available, but I am glad it wasn't available in the game readily. It would totally ruin the immersion for me. In fact, some people had the immersion ruined for them just by knowing that Alexander is usually aggressive without seeing any numbers. So the game added random personalities and random seeds.
Players wanting MORE randomness in their games seems to go against your hypothesis. The more randomness, the less informed decisions I can make.
No, I just like the quests being available as replacement for random events for new players.
But maybe this solution would be the common ground we're looking for:
Adding an advanced option that shows them in the tooltip. The people who really want to know will find the option, the people who just want to play will not - and everyone who's in between those two groups will probably find it sooner or later and then decide if he wants to use it or not.
That way the information can be available for anyone who wants to have it (for SP it already is, via addon), but its still not forced on people who enjoy these surprises.
this is not true. imagine a game whereby you play an army and you might make a decision to move your artillery up to shoot at the enemy position but because the enemy used air support to destroy your artillery, you can not use it anymore. That would still be a game.
Or if you want a random analogue, say you move up your aircraft to support your attack on enemy position but because of some random stormy weather, you can not use that anymore, that would still be a game.
so yes, making a decision knowing that you might only be able to utilise the resulting resources 50% of the time or other variation of the theme will still make a game.
yes and it shows how bad of a choice 1UPT really is. You have this problems that fundamentally resulted from the 1UPT choice in all aspects of the game.
and 1UPT was actually there because the civ5 designer wanted panzer general lol
You are not "forced" to look at external sources in order to complete the quests. The game does not literally alt tab you out and open a wiki page so you can choose the right choices for tech progression and building choices. Some people like to have this information available to them, I understand and wish it was available in the 'pedia or as an advanced option off by default.
There is another game that doesn't tell you much about how to play it. Maybe you have heard of it, its a little game called Minecraft. It doesn't tell you how to make sticks, or make a pick, or anything else. It encourages exploration in many different facets. Exploring the environment, what you can make with the things you find, ect. Civilzation has always had a degree of randomness and hidden information associated with it. Saying that all information should be available to the player is hyperbole.
In both Civ BE and Minecraft there are mods you can activate that will suit the gameplay experience to your desire. The designers vision of the game was to error on the side of information exploration rather than information overload. If you want more information vistin the convenient steam workshop, I don't see what the big deal is here.
If the information is on by default then that would reduce the exploration that is available for people who enjoy to play that way. This would reduce the experience of exploration, which the designers seemed to have focused on.
Minecraft is not a competitive multiplayer game in which 1 player wins and everyone else loses. It's not a valid comparison.
And it just doesn't work in singleplayer as it only ends up with the player getting stuck crafting the same limited number of items without even knowing those other items exist. (Notch used the Achievements system to guide players through the process by telling them they exist, similar to the 'put it in Civilopedia solution', but it's hard to find if you don't know about that.)
If you play multiplayer or have friends playing Minecraft that tell you about it, it works, but in singleplayer it makes the game terrible unless you consult an external information source (I couldn't really start playing Minecraft properly until I looked things up on the wiki). For that reason, every single console port of Minecraft instead has a full crafting interface that shows you what things you can craft and what things you need to craft them.
Is there anybody who thinks this is a bad idea? Why are people still arguing how it should be?
I felt really cheated, and swore I'd never buy a Firaxis product again, until I found the mod that shows the quest.
People have different tastes, and options are good.
Oh, and the developers responsible for the quest system should be fed to Wolf Beetles.
Hidden gameplay rules and consequences that are not reasonably knowable before committing are fake difficulty, and strategy games should have no place for fake difficulty. In a genre where you choices are supposed to matter, it's vexing the amount of hand-holding players get, only to have inaccessible-to-new-player junk tossed in alongside :/.
Except that its not about difficulty but about immersion.
Separate names with a comma.