This Game Sucks

[Atomation]

I am not aware that I've admitted to anything damning. I'm also not aware of ever denying that I play single player, which is the dominant form of the game. Multiplayer is not a priority in the civ franchise. You are in the vast minority, here. Therefore... Is SP not the most valid way to play the game? It is what the game was designed for, thus your MP fetish is just that, fetish. Go play your bastardized game.

Your ignorant proclamation that the game sucks (made after, apparently, 10 minutes of playing the demo and looking at the pedia!) is not an MP matter. Had you added the words "for MP", than sure. But as it is, no. You have no goddamn idea of what you are talking about, as you have not played the damn game, and your threads do no more than misinform people who are looking for actual info on the game. In short, you are a troll.


Disclaimer: I really have nothing against MP. I have not played MP simply because Civ4 bored me; I played exclusively mods, and they were harder to get MP games going. With Civ5, I plan to get a few friends involved for an MP game.

Naturally, that game will be quite fun, regardless of what the moron above me believes.

To say that civ has a vast majority single-player base is like saying that china has mostly chinese people in its borders. The majority of the player base is a biproduct of the game design, not vice versa. IF the game had better multiplayer support, it would be a very strong multiplayer game, and frankly the multiplayer gaming community in general is extremely large and devotes much more time to gaming than single player casuals. Not to mention that a well balanced multiplayer game would still be as fun for singleplayer, while the opposite is not true in any way.

[Atomation]

Oh god, Ozzy why is it not surprising to me that you find Civ5 a complex game? You who find tying your shoes a complexity. Anyone who uses the word complex in the same sentence when referring to the game Civilization should not be allowed to leave their house without adult supervision.

It's very difficult to see the complexities until you have mastered the basics and can see with a keener eye. This is true of everything, and civ5 is no different. Whether or not those complexities are legitimate and thought provoking is another matter.

[DriXnaK]

Atomation...who are you? Why is there this lone voice of reason in a sea of fanboy insanity? It's lost though because the reality is that as long as Sid Meier is at the helm you will have each release more simplified than the last with more problems than the last as Comrade Sid thinks people want simple games with no multiplayer. As someone said on civfanatics, the real genius behind civ was Brian Reynolds.

[yin26]

Actually, a number of MP considerations simply don't work in SP, either. Think of Diplomacy as an obvious example, and certain strategies or play styles from MP, even if "ported" perfectly in the SP AI simply wouldn't appeal to a lot of SP people. Not because MP is somehow "better" - but because the very nature of competitive human to human play is its own world. I used to play RTS's competitively as part of a clan, and I love it! I don't want or need that with my Civ games, but that's just me.

The point is that there are enough points of serious convergence that doing EITHER one very well takes a tremendous commitment of time and resources. Doing BOTH well - and imagining that a person could go in and out of SP/MP somehow seamlessly - is an order of magnitude more difficult. Perhaps impossible.

[Krill]

Actually, a number of MP considerations simply don't work in SP, either. Think of Diplomacy as an obvious example, and certain strategies or play styles from MP, even if "ported" perfectly in the SP AI simply wouldn't appeal to a lot of SP people. Not because MP is somehow "better" - but because the very nature of competitive human to human play is its own world. I used to play RTS's competitively as part of a clan, and I love it! I don't want or need that with my Civ games, but that's just me.

Diplomacy is a bad example, because MP diplomacy is exactly what you'd get in SP if the AI understand game theory.

The point is that there are enough points of serious convergence that doing EITHER one very well takes a tremendous commitment of time and resources. Doing BOTH well - and imagining that a person could go in and out of SP/MP somehow seamlessly - is an order of magnitude more difficult. Perhaps impossible.

The good players can do that...but again, that comes down to the AI being a bundle of subroutines instead of a fully cognitive mind.

Still, when a game is released and you are saying that you need to increase the difficulty, you have done something that is at the very least different to the last great release that was CIV, where everyone had to decrease difficulty, and people still aren;t consistently beating diety after 5 years.

[DriXnaK]

Civ2 was able to do it just fine. Then again, that was Brian Reynold's creation. Face it, Sid Meier is a fraud undeserving of his reputation. As soon as he took the helm and Brian Reynolds left the game was completely down hill from there.

[Modo44]

IMO PBEM is a fun MP port of SP gameplay. But it requires heaps of patience even in scenarios, so it's not for everyone.

[Ming]

Still in the Anger phase. This is normal. Don't beat yourself over it. You have found here in Poly a loving community, and we accept you as you are and hope to hold your hand throughout this journey.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA!

[DriXnaK]

You've apparently lost your sense of wit over the years Ming if you find that to be funny. Not surprising since I must question the sanity of someone who would voluntarily live in Chicago anyway and become a moderator on a forum.

[Zoetstofzoetje]

Ming, can you explain to this guy that Chicago is overflowing with young beautiful women?

[yin26]

Diplomacy is a bad example, because MP diplomacy is exactly what you'd get in SP if the AI understand game theory.

Which it never will, of course (not in our lifetimes, anyway). I love the idea, though.

The good players can do that...but again, that comes down to the AI being a bundle of subroutines instead of a fully cognitive mind.

Sorry, I meant the developers, not the players. Of course many players go in and out of MP/SP. Sadly on the development side, it's simply a false comfort to think that a great SP game just magically becomes a great MP game or that a great MP game by definition makes for a great SP game. Just not reality, at least in a Civ context. Both SP and MP can and should offer something that utilizes the best aspects of those different environments. I suspect that if Firaxis decided to make a dedicated MP game from the ground up, built by MPers for MPers, it would rock. But it also will never happen if history is any judge.

[yin26]

Still, when a game is released and you are saying that you need to increase the difficulty, you have done something that is at the very least different to the last great release that was CIV, where everyone had to decrease difficulty, and people still aren;t consistently beating diety after 5 years.

No argument here. There is work to be done for sure. I don't recall where Civ4 vanilla was in this regard, though. I know we made a LOT of progress post vanilla, and that will obviously hold true here, too.

[Jvstin]

You've apparently lost your sense of wit over the years Ming if you find that to be funny. Not surprising since I must question the sanity of someone who would voluntarily live in Chicago anyway and become a moderator on a forum.

Trying to provoke negative attention from people, by insulting them as you have taken to doing, is not psychologically healthy. You were on better ground when you were slamming Civ 3,4 and 5 rather than trying to slam fellow board members here. (Or trying to slam Mr. Meier, either).

[Dinner]

Well, I see two old posters who are credited as beta testers, Nikolai and Yin. Now that the game is out, please do tell whether you actually enjoy playing its final version?
This was the first Civ ever I thought sucked big time. Graphics are a step back, granted, diplomacy is a joke (even more than in the previous incarnation). 1UP is good. But the game is BORING. Nothing happens for ages. No one attacks me, we are just pushing a couple of units around, waiting for something to be built. And nothing ever is. I have no idea what is going on. The level is Prince, right out of the box, and I was not even trying to get a grasp on what was going on...
Epic fail, IMHO.
By the way, a special raspberry award goes to the 'streamlined interface'. So much for the jabs at Soren and Civ4. He did a MUCH better job even in vanilla version. This is worse than Civ3. The worst Civ in the series so far.

I have to agree. It's just boring with nothing engaging or interesting happening. I know they dumbed it down so that retards and 5 year olds can play the game without having to ever think about anything but the result is just uninteresting and the UI would never work in MP. It's like they took everything good out of Civ4 and then only put the bad aspects into Civ5.

[Krill]

C4 vanilla was actually pretty crap with the AI...but it was a step up from C3. I still remember the communal "D'oh" moment when someone massively abused the fact that horses were always visible at hte start of the game. I don't think C5 has a whole quite that large , but it still seems to have all of these nigly small ones that just seem worse than C4 did at the start. Sure, they can get ironed out, but I think you have further to go than C4 did to being polished...