Shafer looking back at CIV5

[Sareln]

He's doing another 4x that he just kickstarted.

One of the updates is a retrospective on CIV5 in the context of this new game.

Interesting reading.

http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/jons...sts/404789

[Mardoc]

That is a fairly surreal essay to read. It's 'look at me, I'm awesome, and so were the people I worked with, mixed with...well, the closest thing I can think of is some of Sullla's essays.

It's so weird to see such an exhaustive list of mistakes and such an upbeat tone, simultaneously.

I'm a tad nervous that a lot of his paragraphs are a fairly good analysis of the flaws in the Civ5 design, ending with 'and that's what we're going to avoid in ATG as we make the best game ever', rather than details. I guess it did its job, though. I still won't spend any money on his game until I see it completed and reviewed, but I'm now willing to watch and give it that chance.

[scooter]

Interesting read, thanks for posting. It was odd to see him make claims that X feature was really great and then write 4-5 paragraphs about why it was actually pretty terrible. In particular, he starts the 1UPT section by claiming Civ5's combat system was the best of all Civ games, and then he... basically disproves that claim .

Still, the critiques were pretty honest, but I have no real interest in this game.

[Sian]

well ... hats off for Shafer to pretty much admit that while the ideas an intentions were sound, the execution was somewhat lacking in nearly any part of CiV, either because of forests making it impossible to see trees or trees blocking for the forests.

And frankly ... i argee on his views of Policies vs Civics ... that debate was probably where CiV got off the best, and there's sound arguments for both parties

That said, i think they might just have struck gold on the time period ... practically every other time periods (if not going deep into ancient) is bloated with games attacking it from several different angles ... the Dark Ages from 300-1000 is rather lacking in games (only one i can mention offhand is the expansion to Rome: Total war ... whathisface ... Barbarian invasion?)

[T-hawk]

It's so weird to see such an exhaustive list of mistakes and such an upbeat tone, simultaneously.

Yeah, right? This bit had me laughing:

"Civ 5's gameplay had several rough edges at release, but those were all due to decisions I made with the design. My friends over at Firaxis have done an excellent job improving the gameplay following my departure, and I can't wait to see what they do next!"

He admits that Civ 5 was better off without him, in the weirdest backhanded-self-complimenty way I've ever seen.

Anyway, it's worth reiterating once more that Civ 4 didn't become what it is by accident. It got there thanks to an exhaustive eighteen-month playtest with the best strategy gaming minds in the world. That's what Civ 5 fundamentally didn't have.

[Krill]

And that's what Shafer won't have in his next venture either: to get onto the Beta and Alpha tests he is accepting payment.

Yeah, that'll work out Jon.

[Jowy]

Can't really do in-depth testing with 40k budget. These kickstarter games are mostly shit anyway, just cashing in on nostalgia.

[Krill]

No. CIV alpha/beta test group was all volunteer, Firaxis didn't even host the patches for download. All they did was post DVD's out to people (I still got mine somewhere FWIW).

[Sullla]

Surreal for me reading that post. And despite what you might think, I have a lot of respect for Jon Shafer. He's been very open about his past mistakes, and his hopes of avoiding them in the future. Developing any strategy game is an incredibly difficult task, and while I do think that Jon made a lot of mistakes in the Civ5 design, he's still working and trying to improve as a designer. We should want to see more people in the gaming industry willing to be so honest.

Also, can folks stop referring to what I wrote about Civ5 as "rants"? That term has a lot of pejorative implications, and when the actual game designer himself comes out and admits that those very criticisms were valid, it's a sign that they shouldn't be thrown in with whatever the latest nutso is posting on reddit. Thanks.

[Krill]

Ask and ye shall recieve

Howdy sir, it's been a while!


ATG will almost certainly be single-player only. As you well know, I'm a pretty big fan of multiplayer and it's something we'd really like to add, but doing so requires a seriously nontrivial investment. Given that we’re only three people (two of which are part-time) our current schedule and budget doesn’t really have much flexibility. However, if ATG is as successful as we hope we'll definitely be considering it for future projects. It's much easier to start with MP in mind than to try and wedge it in later (PTW, anyone?).

I know it's not a "traditional" MP mode, but we are thinking about hotseat for ATG, since that would be quite a bit easier to implement. Can't make any promises right now though!


It's important to get a wide array of feedback. Anyone who is willing to pay more than necessary to help test the game is going to be passionate about wanting it to work, but the overall group interest in it will be pretty varied. Some are attracted to the game's theme, others find the mechanics promising, and a few simply because they've enjoyed my past work.

Given that 4X games appeal to a fairly niche audience to begin with, bringing in as many passionate folks as possible only helps. You always want to have a large testing group, and one of the challenges I've had to deal with in the past was constantly rebuilding as the best testers gradually drifted off into other hobbies and phases of life.

However, as DaviddesJ said, that doesn't preclude me from inviting people I'm familiar with and already know the talents of. But there's certainly no guarantee that I'll hand everyone a golden ticket, and the higher tiers are a way of ensuring you get seat at the table if that's something you'd really like.

- Jon