Krill
Deity
But in line with 2K actions, which is what is the problem. Words don't mean anything, actions do. Here, at least.
Zero day DLC = disrespecting the customer
- Thread starter phungus420
- Start date
But in line with 2K actions, which is what is the problem. Words don't mean anything, actions do. Here, at least.
Thyrwyn
Guardian at the Gate
And, since no "action" is possible until the game is released, this is all moot, yes?
phungus420
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,296
Thyrwyn, the most recent "action" we have seen from Firaxis is them announcing they will be removing content in order to maximize profits from DLC. Hence the pessimism; if this is the direction they have chosen to take, it is only logical for us to conclude they will continue with similar "actions".
Thyrwyn
Guardian at the Gate
Announcement = Action. OK.
1) Since the game was "announced" with 18 civs, doesn't the presence of a 19th civ in the Deluxe Edition mean that content was "created" for the Deluxe Edition, rather than "removed" from the originally announced game? If the game is released with 17 civs, I will be the first to openly admit to being misguided in my optimism and support.
2) They have also "announced" that the game will be the most moddable civ yet - but many continue to bemoan Civ V's lack of moddability. And don't give me the old "evidence points to the contrary" - I (and others) have discussed ad nauseam how the presence of an extra civ need not pose moddability issues.
3) They have "announced" that you will still be able to share mods through sites such as civfanatics.
So, logically, I do not see any reason for said pessimism. And if we are going to cling to the action speaks louder than words credo, I think it would behoove us to avoid rampant speculation.
PS - Phungus (and everyone else): I realize that we are on different sides in this regard. Please believe me when I say that I am not trying to be belligerent or to make this personal. I have nothing but the utmost respect for this community and the users that post here. If you're ever in State College, let me know: I'll buy you a pint
1) Since the game was "announced" with 18 civs, doesn't the presence of a 19th civ in the Deluxe Edition mean that content was "created" for the Deluxe Edition, rather than "removed" from the originally announced game? If the game is released with 17 civs, I will be the first to openly admit to being misguided in my optimism and support.
2) They have also "announced" that the game will be the most moddable civ yet - but many continue to bemoan Civ V's lack of moddability. And don't give me the old "evidence points to the contrary" - I (and others) have discussed ad nauseam how the presence of an extra civ need not pose moddability issues.
3) They have "announced" that you will still be able to share mods through sites such as civfanatics.
So, logically, I do not see any reason for said pessimism. And if we are going to cling to the action speaks louder than words credo, I think it would behoove us to avoid rampant speculation.
PS - Phungus (and everyone else): I realize that we are on different sides in this regard. Please believe me when I say that I am not trying to be belligerent or to make this personal. I have nothing but the utmost respect for this community and the users that post here. If you're ever in State College, let me know: I'll buy you a pint
I seriously would not put it past Firaxis to make Babylon the 18th civ, only 17 civs in vanilla. It would make a lot of sense considering that there was a lot of mystery about the 18th civ and it was not long before they announced the deluxe edition and Babylon. Just speculation, of course.
For peace of mind, maybe someone can point me to an official statement of 18 civs in the standard version?
For peace of mind, maybe someone can point me to an official statement of 18 civs in the standard version?
For peace of mind, maybe someone can point me to an official statement of 18 civs in the standard version?
This sentence really scares me...
Corrected. Thank you.
Speculation, yes. Very much so. But honestly, I don't believe a single promise that comes out of the 2K Marketing Department. Salesmen are no better than politicians, as far as I'm concerned. Part of my speculation is based on the handling of another game that I play, which is digitally distributed (GalCiv2). Mods for that game must now be "approved", according to the last forum posts that I read a few weeks ago. It seems they have a "content approval system" now. I believe 2K has also made vague statements to that effect.
My little list was a worst case scenario. I don't really believe that 2K will screw us that badly, but I do expect there to be issues with mods in some way. Saying that there is this incredible moddability in one sentence, and then saying that there will be some sort of review process for mod content suggests to me that "official" mods will be available through Steam, and unofficial mods may break some official content. My other fear is that Steam and 2K will nickel and dime us to death with little tidbits of game components, if not the spiffy modding tools that we need in the process.
Of course, I could be totally wrong about all of this, and I hope that I am. But I refuse to pre-order, or even purchase Civ5 before it's released and these questions can be answered by having the product in hand. Right now, it's a case of "The cheque is in the mail."
For me, it's "Show me the money."
mechaerik
Tuturuu!
Sometimes what someone says is different from what is.
We really need to wait and see what details they release in the next 4 months to get a better picture for arguments sake. That aside, it gave me peace of mind that one of our own modders was hired to work on Civ5. But then again, business is business.
Hopefully he can withstand the temptation and continue to look out for gamers best interests.
2K Greg
<span style="font-weight:bold; text-decoration: un
- Joined
- May 24, 2010
- Messages
- 370
For peace of mind, maybe someone can point me to an official statement of 18 civs in the standard version?
Okay, here is an official statement: The standard version of the game contains 18 playable civs.
Babylon is a bonus civilization in the Deluxe edition, and it's in addition to the 18 in the standard edition.
Okay, here is an official statement: The standard version of the game contains 18 playable civs.
Babylon is a bonus civilization in the Deluxe edition, and it's in addition to the 18 in the standard edition.
Thank you for the confirmation. Since you're making an effort to ensure your answers are 100% correct, even better.
Jon Shafer - civ5 lead designer if I recall. He was the one to thank for the Final Frontier mod for BtS. I think there were some other mods or scenarios too but I forget which ones.
Phinaeus
Chieftain
Absolutely greedy on Firaxis's part. Like OP said, aesthetic DLC is fine but the Babylonian Civ should be with the first purchase. Paid DLC isn't encouraging more development of a game; it's encouraging developers to think, "Hey I can just restrict what we have currently and rake in more profit in a couple of months".
deanej
Deity
Jon Shafer - civ5 lead designer if I recall. He was the one to thank for the Final Frontier mod for BtS. I think there were some other mods or scenarios too but I forget which ones.
Chinese Unification and Genghis Khan for Warlords and Battle For East Asia and World War I for vanilla 1.61.
Krill
Deity
Jon was hired to be a dev for CIV, after an intern-ship at Firaxis. He worked on Warlords/BtS before becoming lead for CiV.
Alsark
Noble
Thank you for the confirmation. Since you're making an effort to ensure your answers are 100% correct, even better.
Well we also know this to be true because of the website (which has 18 civilizations): http://www.civilization5.com/#/civilizations/
ZimbuTheMonkey
King
I posted this on another thread, but it's relevant here and I have pretty strong feelings about this type of DLC:
I think one of the most underhanded and douchy things a developer can do is add a "deluxe/premium/limited/collector's" edition of the game and have it unlock exclusive in-game features (that 99% of the time are already present in the game-files).
We want to pay you, and we want your game. Stop nickel-and-diming us by locking existing features until we pay the extra fee. This is fine for expansions or future DLCs but when I'm buying a new game, make it a good experience for me and not make me think either:
1. "Maybe I should have paid more unlock that civ/weapon/map"
-OR-
2. "I feel like a sucker for paying for this premium content"
This is the same for preorder "bonuses". Why should a gamer be penalized for simply buying the game later than others? It makes no sense, their money is just as good. Stop trying to undermine the importance of demos, we don't want to pay you without reading the reviews and trying out the game for ourselves just because there is a pressure to pre-order for the extra content.
I think one of the most underhanded and douchy things a developer can do is add a "deluxe/premium/limited/collector's" edition of the game and have it unlock exclusive in-game features (that 99% of the time are already present in the game-files).
We want to pay you, and we want your game. Stop nickel-and-diming us by locking existing features until we pay the extra fee. This is fine for expansions or future DLCs but when I'm buying a new game, make it a good experience for me and not make me think either:
1. "Maybe I should have paid more unlock that civ/weapon/map"
-OR-
2. "I feel like a sucker for paying for this premium content"
This is the same for preorder "bonuses". Why should a gamer be penalized for simply buying the game later than others? It makes no sense, their money is just as good. Stop trying to undermine the importance of demos, we don't want to pay you without reading the reviews and trying out the game for ourselves just because there is a pressure to pre-order for the extra content.
It's true. However we didn't have that list on June 9.
