CIV 4 was best

[mjt131]

Civ 5 is worst civilization game ever! Why not just upgrade Civ 4 which was superb. I guess many civ 4 players would still be ready to buy extension dvd for that game and pay more than civ 5 cost.

[brxbrx]

try civ 4 vanilla before saying that civ 4 is THE BEST.

you'll find that it's the expansions that made the game THE BEST.

so why don't you wait until firaxis pops one out?

[Maktaka]

Yeah, let's just turn Civ into the Call of Duty model! Same stupid game every single year, just shove enough changes in to call it new and sell it for $60.

[jdog5000]

try civ 4 vanilla before saying that civ 4 is THE BEST.

you'll find that it's the expansions that made the game THE BEST.

so why don't you wait until firaxis pops one out?

Word. .

[Artifex]

so why don't you wait until firaxis pops one out?

Are we equating this to a bad marriage now? Fits to well imo.

[the man of doom]

Yeah, let's just turn Civ into the Call of Duty model! Same stupid game every single year, just shove enough changes in to call it new and sell it for $60.

QFT
it is the same thing with madden every year
havent bought one since madden 07 since ea keeps feeding us the same BS every year

[Valkrionn]

All sports games are designed around that principle.

As are virtually all of Activision's franchises. And the majority of those of other publishers.

[NitroPhantasm]

try civ 4 vanilla before saying that civ 4 is THE BEST.

you'll find that it's the expansions that made the game THE BEST.

so why don't you wait until firaxis pops one out?I thought CIV IV was excellent even before the expansions. In fact, I missed the original CIV IV theme song once the expansion was added. My son and I had many hours of fun. CIV V is an unplayed game. Neither of us plays it for long. Hotseat, when it arrives, will be a test of whether CIV V was worth it - worth putting up with Steam especially. So many people love Steam so why not just make it optional for those folks. I hate it and want it off my computer. That aside, if the game play is better after hotseat for my son and I, I will overlook the crummy despicable steam software shoved down my throat in order to play a game, something that was supposed to only be required for initial installation but turned out to be a lifetime commitment (for the life of CIV V on my computer).

[MoistPancake]

I thought CIV IV was excellent even before the expansions. In fact, I missed the original CIV IV theme song once the expansion was added. My son and I had many hours of fun. CIV V is an unplayed game. Neither of us plays it for long. Hotseat, when it arrives, will be a test of whether CIV V was worth it - worth putting up with Steam especially. So many people love Steam so why not just make it optional for those folks. I hate it and want it off my computer. That aside, if the game play is better after hotseat for my son and I, I will overlook the crummy despicable steam software shoved down my throat in order to play a game, something that was supposed to only be required for initial installation but turned out to be a lifetime commitment (for the life of CIV V on my computer).

Steam was one of the best things to happen to the PC gaming industry.

[mjt131]

Actually what I meant was Civ 4 vanilla. But it would still be possible to improve that with more expansion DVD.

[Oosh]

I thought CIV IV was excellent even before the expansions. In fact, I missed the original CIV IV theme song once the expansion was added. My son and I had many hours of fun. CIV V is an unplayed game. Neither of us plays it for long.Well you see Civ IV was unplayable for me until numerous patches in, but by then I'd moved on, and I didn't get back in to it properly until BtS.

The theme songs were/are unimportant to me. In fact I currently play Civ V in silence, but only so I can listen out for whatever mischief my Staffy pup is getting in to.

Civ IV will always be there for you to return to, whatever other crimes it may have perpetrated against you, Steam hasn't taken that away..

[Mjollinor]

I'm undecided on Civ 5, but like the OP much prefer civ 4.

The problem I have with civ 5 is the lack of epicness, with so fewer units, the game has way less combat, at least in my experience. This would be fine if the game had a far more expansive and interesting city building, economic, and diplomatic arena. Instead these are all terrible at worst, boring at best. I'm actually fine with the shift to iupt, but this is a game crying out for complexity an grandness in other areas to accommodate the reduction in en masse combat.

This game is dull. It's going to take one hell of an expansion to make it un dull.

[SamBC]

To me, an army spread out across the countryside is far more 'epic' than two huge stacks crashing into each other.

I will agree, though, that there should be more social and economic complexity and interrelation.

[oblio]

I wonder if the question is more which game is more enjoyable, entertaining etc. That's a personal choice based on why you play either game and what you hope to get out of it. While common in many ways, the games are different enough so entirely acceptable that some like one and some the other. I enjoy both but like Civ V more because its less frustrating, I'm more in control and I'm less likely to get beat because of random game play (SOD, religion, spies, culture etc.). But that's my preference playing this game as a diversion ... no need for too much complexity.

I can say I don't like FPS and RTS games much, tried Starcraft 2 but not my cup of tea and strugggling to get into Shogun. Along the same vein, I just get more into TBS games like Civ V and Civ 1V (including BTS) and both being good games, enjoy one more than the other. To each their own.... enjoy the one you like the most and play away, its all good and its all fun.

[civdiss]

I think CIV V has the potential to be a much better game than CIV IV BTS was. I like some of the changes like the 1UPT, cities defending themselves, city states, social policies, improved starting map locations, embarkation etc. Though they could certainly borrow features from the previous versions especially in MP. Hopefully in a couple of years we will have the finished article

[mwallyn]

*sigh* This thread again...you all decry Civ V as the worst in the series and a terrible game in its own right. Unplayable is the word that most often crosses the lips. Unplayable is Big Rigs! Over the Road Racing. Civ V is not unplayable, not by a long shot. I know many have eagerly held out for things like Hotseat and better multiplayer, but Civ in general has been a very single-player series. Multiplayer has been but an add-on through an expansion in most of the Civ games thus far. Even so, at least the improvements they are making to the game affect both single players and multiplayers, making the gaming experience better for everyone in the long run.

You also trash EA and Activision for constantly forcing the same exact game out each and every year, but at the same time you say why not just remake Civ IV with pretty graphics and MAYBE 1UPT. Firaxis is trying to do just the opposite of that; they tried to make Civ V a fresh experience while still keeping to its original roots. Yes, it wasn't perfect, but I like many of the changes they have made to the game (Self-defending cities, hexes, graphics, etc). I would have been disappointed with a Civ IV rehash a-la Starcraft II. I give credit to 2k and Firaxis for at least trying to refresh the Civ series, though hurrying it out wasn't such a great idea.

I know the game needs some work, but is it any different from Civ IV vanilla? IV was rife with bugs and errors, not to mention they completely screwed up its shipping, sending two of the same disk or mislabeling the disks in the package! It generally took to BtS for people to truly recognize Civ IV as a great game. So until Civ V reaches that point, there isn't any point in judging Civ V vanilla against its fully-realized predecessor, BtS.

[Furball]

If civ iv is the best go play that and pester the civ iv forum while the rest of us enjoy civ v.

[brxbrx]

If civ iv is the best go play that and pester the civ iv forum while the rest of us enjoy civ v.

well, "enjoy" isn't quite the word I'd use, but close enough ;)

[Bantams]

try civ 4 vanilla before saying that civ 4 is THE BEST.

you'll find that it's the expansions that made the game THE BEST.

so why don't you wait until firaxis pops one out?

If I recall vaniila worked after the FIRST patch

[NitroPhantasm]

Well you see Civ IV was unplayable for me until numerous patches in, but by then I'd moved on, and I didn't get back in to it properly until BtS.

The theme songs were/are unimportant to me. In fact I currently play Civ V in silence, but only so I can listen out for whatever mischief my Staffy pup is getting in to.

Civ IV will always be there for you to return to, whatever other crimes it may have perpetrated against you, Steam hasn't taken that away..[/QUOTE]

Very true. And I own that game. Its as much mine as any movie DVD I own. Don't technical here... because I know I don't own a single movie... but that disk with "Schultze Gets the Blues" on it is mine even if the company never produces it again for sale.

[NitroPhantasm]

If I recall vaniila worked after the FIRST patchI never had a problem with it. My son learned so much about history, great wonders and more. I love that game. And I own a copy. Its mine. No one is taking it. And as long as I keep the disk safe it will play and play and play even if all related companies shut down that game will play on my computer. Can't say the same for CIV V.

[NitroPhantasm]

Steam was one of the best things to happen to the PC gaming industry.I'll take your word for it. It was not the best for all consumers. I feel that any day the game will be dumped by Steam and amount to excessive unusable code to be deleted on my machine.

[Valkrionn]

That, my friend, amounts to a huge heaping pile of good ol' fashioned paranoia.

Steam is just too damn profitable to go under the table. Even were Valve to vanish, Steam would be bought by another company and continued on.

[NitroPhantasm]

That, my friend, amounts to a huge heaping pile of good ol' fashioned paranoia.

Steam is just too damn profitable to go under the table. Even were Valve to vanish, Steam would be bought by another company and continued on.Sort of. I pity the people who have all sorts of games on Steam who can end up with their entire account shut down on a misunderstanding and have no recourse. I've seen people here have this happen.

[Lloydthegreat]

Haha Civ IV was the best!? No, it was a great game, but it had it's issues like any game. Maybe I'm thinking this because I never bought BtS? Oh well, Civ V and Civ IV are different enough games that when I try to go back and play Civ IV I can't. The thought of SoD and religion keeps me away from the game. For now I can only wish that I hadn't bought Civ V when it came out because I knew that my computer was waaaaay below minimum, but I just couldn't resist :p

[Bantams]

Sort of. I pity the people who have all sorts of games on Steam who can end up with their entire account shut down on a misunderstanding and have no recourse. I've seen people here have this happen.

Happened too me I lost my Original Password Created like 4 years ago when my ISP and email addy was something else and trying to Explain to Valve that I couldnt re access my Acount was just going round in Circles Lucky for me that account only had C3C on it anyway but still :(

[NitroPhantasm]

Happened too me I lost my Original Password Created like 4 years ago when my ISP and email addy was something else and trying to Explain to Valve that I couldnt re access my Acount was just going round in Circles Lucky for me that account only had C3C on it anyway but still :(There are many examples of this. This is the cost to a consumer for accepting subscriptions rather than copy ownership(to red herring tossers... note I did not say ownership).

[Txurce]

There are many examples of this. This is the cost to a consumer for accepting subscriptions rather than copy ownership(to red herring tossers... note I did not say ownership).

I'm sure there are more examples of lost and damaged disks than lost accounts - and there is no recourse for those people. I'll take Steam any day.

[Mjollinor]

To me, an army spread out across the countryside is far more 'epic' than two huge stacks crashing into each other.

I will agree, though, that there should be more social and economic complexity and interrelation.

Fair point.

I guess what I ean by epic, isn't necessarily to support SOD, as the biggest problem with those was the lack of tactical complexity. The new combat system is def a step in the right direction.

What I mean by epic though, is that you aren't constantly feeling like you are under threat, that excitement component I guess. Which again I am more than fine with, if there was something else to distract you with.

Personally I think they can pretty much leave the combat system as it is. Develop the grandness and complexity of the economic and diplomatic systems and I think civ 5 would for me go from boring to easily the best in the series.

ATM though, these are dull.

[Vito_Lucente]

I agree, but Civ 5 was good. Just not as good as Civ 4 to me...

[Takao]

I guess what I ean by epic, isn't necessarily to support SOD, as the biggest problem with those was the lack of tactical complexity. The new combat system is def a step in the right direction.
Ummm...No. 1UpT is a step sideways, going from one extreme to the other, it is no better and no worse than SoDs. However, with the larger map scales, 1UpT is downright idiotic. 1UpT worked in the Panzer General series, because both the map scale, and the number of units controlled by the player were limited. Unfortunately, both of those are missing in Civ V.

IMHO, Jon really created a Charlie Foxtrot, by ramming 1UpT into a game it was never meant for. Many other games of Civ's size and scale have handled tactical combat and maneuvering much better than V.

As for the OP. Yes, I agree that Civ IV vanilla is much better than Civ V vanilla. IV was just a much more engrossing game than V. Many an hour was wasted playing IV. With V, I haven't touched it much after the first week of release. Heck, I have played more Panzer General and Civ II, since Civ V's release, than I have Civ V. So, for me, yes, Civ V is that bad.

[Artifex]

To each their own. I think 1UPT works very well for civ, in theory.
Unfortunately the AI is not sophisticated enough to handle it. Also there is no reason to impose the system on non-combat units.

IV was quite good, but had several flaws. BTS made it exceptional, but nothing is perfect.
That left us with very high expectations for V.

V is average, and in many ways flawed. Leaving those of us with long memories to hope, perhaps naively, for a BTS-esk transformation to strike the series again. Leave us our hopes, even if you believe them delusions.

[snake509]

Civ 5 is worst civilization game ever! Why not just upgrade Civ 4 which was superb. I guess many civ 4 players would still be ready to buy extension dvd for that game and pay more than civ 5 cost.

Please go jump off a bridge and leave these damn forums. Nobody gives a ☺☺☺☺ what your opinion is, you're merely starting a flame thread....I happen to love Civ 4 and Civ 5, neither above the other, they are both fun.....so please keep your moronic opinions to yourself.

[NitroPhantasm]

I'm sure there are more examples of lost and damaged disks than lost accounts - and there is no recourse for those people. I'll take Steam any day.I'm sure there isn't.

[Valkrionn]

I'm sure there are; Hell, I can't even install Civilization 4, due to a scratched disk.

Rather, wouldn't be able to, if not for a backup. But hey.

[NitroPhantasm]

I'm sure there are; Hell, I can't even install Civilization 4, due to a scratched disk.

Rather, wouldn't be able to, if not for a backup. But hey.That's the reason for back ups. And you own that copy. Subscriptions are bull hockey.

[Txurce]

I'm sure there are; Hell, I can't even install Civilization 4, due to a scratched disk.

Rather, wouldn't be able to, if not for a backup. But hey.

Of course there are. It's four games' worth versus one. But the guy has an axe to grind, and he's not going to stop, even though Steam isn't going away, and he's going to have to deal with it for the rest of his Civ-playing life.

[Valkrionn]

Eh... It's not just Civ-playing.

It's game-playing. Services like Steam are going to kill off hardcopies; Simple economics. I'm fairly sure that the same will occur for consoles as well, as memory becomes cheaper and bandwidth more plentiful.

Of course, hardcopies may continue in very limited form for diehards, much like vinyls can still be bought in a few shops... But by and large, they are going to go the way of the dodo.

Now if only publishers could follow suit.

[Edward_TC]

try civ 4 vanilla before saying that civ 4 is THE BEST.

you'll find that it's the expansions that made the game THE BEST.

so why don't you wait until firaxis pops one out?
I loved Civilization IV when it came out. The improvement upon Great People and Religion were great. I also like how they handled Civics in this version by dividing them up into different types so I could mix and match.

When the expansion came out, they only evolved the game to be more enjoyable, especially Beyond the Sword with the Random Events which added more of a story to the game world.

And Civilization IV was better than Civilization III. And I loved Civilization upon its release, and I thought it was even more fun than Civilization II. This is the first time the launch of a Civilization game hasn't been better than the previous in my opinion.

[NitroPhantasm]

Eh... It's not just Civ-playing.

It's game-playing. Services like Steam are going to kill off hardcopies; Simple economics. I'm fairly sure that the same will occur for consoles as well, as memory becomes cheaper and bandwidth more plentiful.

Of course, hardcopies may continue in very limited form for diehards, much like vinyls can still be bought in a few shops... But by and large, they are going to go the way of the dodo.

Now if only publishers could follow suit.Eh. Wrongo. Xbox... without using the live option.... has become a viable alternative. Computer games, if you are correct, will all be subscription, and given the choice, more people will move to a console. Computer games are to become like WoW. Good luck. Subscriptions won't even be like Netflix movies. Netflix will be subscription-based *yet* it *will* allow you to purchase a copy of a movie.

Why? You can return a purchased copy of the game. You can own a copy of the game. You can trade a copy of the game. You can purchase a used copy of the game. You can sell your game. You can play a game without your computer being accessed. You can save space on your computer. You do not have to wait for updates to make the game work because if it does not work, it gets returned. This is the future for educated consumers.

And guess what? No big problem with piracy because console game developers figured out how to prevent this without stripping the prerogatives of the consumer. Computer game companies are too stupid to figure out how to prevent piracy without stripping consumer game copy ownership.

[Valkrionn]

You are correct... If your description applies only to current generation consoles. Consoles will lag behind PCs here, but they will eventually move in the same direction. There are a few reasons for this.

Elimination of virtually all material costs (IE, box, shipping, floor space, etc). Translates to increased profits.
Reduction of the distributor's cut (Valve takes a cut from anything on Steam, but it's less than, say, Walmart would). Translates to increased profits.
Reduction of game resales; Supposedly, this equates to more original game sales, meaning more profit. I'm not convinced, and I see this as a con for the consumer (one of few).


Given the profits to be made from developing online sales... Hell. Your example of the Xbox is ironic; It helped pioneer the DLC setup, which is part of what has lead us in this direction. The 360 has moved farther, enabling you to download whole games right off Live; Another generation or two and it will be the norm, not the exception.

Also: Piracy isn't prevented on consoles at all, it's just generally too much of a hassle to rig a console to play hacked games. It was difficult to crack the PS3, yes, but that's not the GAME developer, it's the CONSOLE developer. Makes sense, given that unlike a PC, every console of a specific brand will be exactly the same, run on proprietary software, and is designed to prevent piracy. Far cry from the typical PC.

[NitroPhantasm]

You are correct... If your description applies only to current generation consoles. Consoles will lag behind PCs here, but they will eventually move in the same direction. There are a few reasons for this.I don't think so.


Elimination of virtually all material costs (IE, box, shipping, floor space, etc). Translates to increased profits.Not if people purchase games less often. People prefer to own than subscribe - its that simple.


Reduction of the distributor's cut (Valve takes a cut from anything on Steam, but it's less than, say, Walmart would).I believe in Walmart. More profit means consumers pay the same. If consumers pay the same, they go with purchasing over subscribing from the piggies.

Reduction of game resales; Supposedly, this equates to more original game sales, meaning more profit. I'm not convinced, and I see this as a con for the consumer (one of few).Let GameStop forever be profitable.


Given the profits to be made from developing online sales... Hell. Your example of the Xbox is ironic; It helped pioneer the DLC setup, which is part of what has lead us in this direction. No doubt... but it does not follow that Xbox which lead... will later follow...


The 360 has moved farther, enabling you to download whole games right off Live; Another generation or two and it will be the norm, not the exception. Sure. But you are provided the option... which is the heart of the matter... and the computer with all the other info the piggies want will be untouched.


Also: Piracy isn't prevented on consoles at all, it's just generally too much of a hassle to rig a console to play hacked games. It was difficult to crack the PS3, yes, but that's not the GAME developer, it's the CONSOLE developer. Makes sense, given that unlike a PC, every console of a specific brand will be exactly the same, run on proprietary software, and is designed to prevent piracy. Far cry from the typical PC.Console game companies should lead the stupid computer game companies here too. Why not find a way to retain this feature?

[Valkrionn]

I don't think so.

Don't be too surprised when it happens.

Of course, I doubt it would happen within the next decade or two. Who knows? You may not be playing games at that point.



Not if people purchase games less often. People prefer to own than subscribe - its that simple.

Actually, fairly sure studies have shown that people who use steam regularly make more game purchases than other consumers. Would have to check, of course, but games are cheaper on Steam.

And to be perfectly frank: The majority of consumers simply don't see a difference between subscription and ownership, until it is thrown in their face (attempt to sell it, for example), and prefer convenience. If bandwidth isn't an issue (and this is becoming more and more the norm), then what's more convenient, hunting down a hardcopy or downloading it from your couch?



I believe in Walmart. More profit means consumers pay the same. If consumers pay the same, they go with purchasing over subscribing from the piggies.

Pay the same initially, yes, but services like Steam offer reduced rates all the time.

BTW: The prices are just as high on Steam, not necessarily because Steam or the publishers insist on it, but because the other distributors insist on it. If Steam can offer lower prices, their sales are hurt; Once these stores become less a factor (just a few years, is my bet, at least for PC games), you may well see the games go down in price.



Let GameStop forever be profitable.

Eh... Somehow, I don't see that happening. Even with all their "Preorder here and get a bonus!" whoring.



No doubt... but it does not follow that Xbox which lead... will later follow...

Given that each generation of the console has moved further in that direction than any other console of it's time, I see a strong correlation.

Of course, it's a group of two, I may be wrong about which console leads the way. I'd still bet on the xbox. ;)



Sure. But you are provided the option... which is the heart of the matter... and the computer with all the other info the piggies want will be untouched.

Yes, because it came out how many years ago? Wait for gen3, and it will account for far more of the console's use. Gen4 or 5, and it'll be the majority of it.



Console game companies should lead the stupid computer game companies here too. Why not find a way to retain this feature?

Game developers do not have the ability to force computer manufacturers to standardize down to a small number of PC varieties.

Only other method is to get the OS involved... Which incidentally, has started. Macs come with an Appstore. Windows wants to do something similar. Note the form of software purchase... Hmm.



Ultimately, I'll be proven right. Which irks me, as I prefer having hardcopies of my games, but there it is. Your purchasing habits are an artifact of an older generation (you've said multiple times you have a son who learned alot from civ4, when it was first released, so a rough estimate of your age is possible), and the cycle is repeating itself. Just like all other generations, you are criticizing change, advancement, anything that doesn't jive with how you grew up.

[NitroPhantasm]

And to be perfectly frank: The majority of consumers simply don't see a difference between subscription and ownership, until it is thrown in their face (attempt to sell it, for example), and prefer convenience. If bandwidth isn't an issue (and this is becoming more and more the norm), then what's more convenient, hunting down a hardcopy or downloading it from your couch?Really?

Saara Toivonen University of Tampere
Olli Sotamaa University of Tampere
Proceeding Futureplay '10 Proceedings of the International Academic Conference on the Future of Game Design and Technology


"Digital distribution of games: the players' perspective"

"Based on the findings the following factors have a significant influence on how players consider digital distribution: amount of time used on game playing, the social activities related to games, familiarity with other forms of downloadable content. A notable majority of those who had downloaded games highlighted the importance of the following issues: wide variety of games available, ease of finding downloadable games, affordability and simple payment methods.

***At the same time, more than half of these people announced that they still preferred to have their games as physical copies.***"

[NitroPhantasm]

Your example of the Xbox is ironic; It helped pioneer the DLC setup, which is part of what has lead us in this direction. The 360 has moved farther, enabling you to download whole games right off Live; Another generation or two and it will be the norm, not the exception.The more I contemplate your wording, the more I see a deeper irony. Xbox shows that you can move to digital subscription without alienating those who do not prefer this. Doesn't this translate into a *broader* base of consumers. The irony is that computer game companies completely miss this.

[Valkrionn]

Really?

Saara Toivonen University of Tampere
Olli Sotamaa University of Tampere
Proceeding Futureplay '10 Proceedings of the International Academic Conference on the Future of Game Design and Technology


"Digital distribution of games: the players' perspective"

"Based on the findings the following factors have a significant influence on how players consider digital distribution: amount of time used on game playing, the social activities related to games, familiarity with other forms of downloadable content. A notable majority of those who had downloaded games highlighted the importance of the following issues: wide variety of games available, ease of finding downloadable games, affordability and simple payment methods.

***At the same time, more than half of these people announced that they still preferred to have their games as physical copies.***"

You'll find that a large proportion will say they prefer physical copies.

That does nothing to negate the fact that convenience is preferred, and that even while saying they'd rather have a hard copy they will often settle for the direct download in order to avoid a trip.

Also, your comment did nothing to settle my point... There is absolutely nothing in there to show that Joe Schmoe is going to understand the difference between Subscription and Ownership until it slaps him in the face. Preferring a hardcopy is just saying you'd rather have something physical in case of accident; Nothing to do with my point.


The more I contemplate your wording, the more I see a deeper irony. Xbox shows that you can move to digital subscription without alienating those who do not prefer this. Doesn't this translate into a *broader* base of consumers. The irony is that computer game companies completely miss this.

You are actually correct here; The issue arises when the costs of providing for a consumer subset outweigh the profits generated.

More and more people transition to digital methods; This is fact, as profits from services such as Live, Steam, Impulse, etc continue to climb, featuring more and more subscribers.

As people switch over, the ratio of Traditional to Digital shrinks. Smaller it becomes, and the less likely publishers are to support that subset. Whether you or I like it does not matter; This is where the trends point.

I will likely never be able to say "I told you so", as it's a change that will take decades to realize fully, but I am absolutely certain that it will happen. Too many forces pushing in that direction.


Also, as I pointed out: Xbox currently represents an early push in that direction. Consoles do not evolve as rapidly as PCs, as they are designed to have lifespans of a decade or more. The next generation should be more telling.

[NitroPhantasm]

I think what we are observing is a novelty effect. Joe Schmoe will become Jow Knows. Demand for ownership will grow as people come to understand what was lost. Also savings are not going to continue as they do now? Why? Because of less competition due to ease of access to the public. This has been demonstrated in research into the music industry.

Michael Berman-Grutzky and Alexej Cederholm (2010) write in "The Obstacles and Opportunities for Digital Distribution in the Video
Game Industry, Today and Tomorrow" the following:

"PC game retail has seen a strong decline in recent years as less space is being given to
the PC shelves in stores. Multi-platform developers are treating the PC like a secondary priority and do not even release
some games for it. The PC used to get many games before consoles and now it is often the other way around."

Why? Consoles reach a broader market. Digitial distribution, while offered and expanding, is not incompatible with physical media. It takes imagination to say they necessarily conflict/ are opposed. They are not opposed when it comes to console sales.

[NitroPhantasm]

An interesting point that seems to be emerging in the literature pertains to you. Modders... their generated content.... Steam assumes ownership, yet you are the author. As games become more compatible with user creativity doesn't the modder get to claim some intellectual property rights over their content even though the game is used as a platform to generate the content? This is not a settled matter regardless of what current user agreements say.

[Valkrionn]

What? Where on earth did I say anything about savings, aside from pointing out that it is in fact physical stores which mandate current prices? Not seeing what that has to do with the subject.

PC games are seeing less development for a wide variety of reasons, but primarily: Piracy, publisher's responses to piracy, and consumer reaction to aforementioned responses. Given the lack of ability to provide absolute safeguards against piracy, and the manner with which publishers respond to it (generally, by blowing it out of proportion, as the majority who pirate would never have purchased in the first place; The pirates that really hurt are those that pirate prior to release, which is preventable). Far less to do with the size of the market, IMO, as even when the two were comparable (or in the PC's favor), things were beginning to swing in this direction. It's been an ongoing trend over the last decade.


And no, I never said that the two were incompatible; The relationship is not Blu-ray vs HD DVD, but rather Blu-ray and DVD. Or DVD and VHS. At some point, the costs of providing physical media will outweigh both the costs and potential consumer backlash from ceasing to support an outdated, but fondly remembered, distribution method. Again, this will likely take decades. But I am certain it will happen nonetheless.

[Valkrionn]

An interesting point that seems to be emerging in the literature pertains to you. Modders... their generated content.... Steam assumes ownership, yet you are the author. As games become more compatible with user creativity doesn't the modder get to claim some intellectual property rights over their content even though the game is used as a platform to generate the content? This is not a settled matter regardless of what current user agreements say.

You realize that Valve allows modders to sell their work, for multiple games? As well as allowing much lower entry bars for indie game developers?

Overall, I actually see the digital method as a good thing for game development, even if as a consumer I still want my hardcopy (and will be sad to see them go). I sincerely hope that the rising prevalence of digital distribution will allow more developers to operate independently. We already know it allows young guns to get into the game far easier, many of whom are able to go on to become viable designers.

[SamBC]

Steam has nothing to do with modding in the current system... rights are surrendered to 2K/Firaxis, and the mods are distributed by GameSpy. Just as a point of information...

[Valkrionn]

I'm aware. Just answered his point generically, rather than for Civ5 specifically. ;)

[NitroPhantasm]

Steam has nothing to do with modding in the current system... rights are surrendered to 2K/Firaxis, and the mods are distributed by GameSpy. Just as a point of information...That's why I said "regardless of what current user agreements say"

[SamBC]

I'm aware. Just answered his point generically, rather than for Civ5 specifically. ;)
I was actually replying to NitroPhantasm, just didn't bother quoting because it didn't seem too important, and then posts appeared in between his and my reply :)

Perhaps it would be better if the modding infrastructure was supported by Steam/Valve.

[NitroPhantasm]

I was actually replying to NitroPhantasm, just didn't bother quoting because it didn't seem too important, and then posts appeared in between his and my reply :)

Perhaps it would be better if the modding infrastructure was supported by Steam/Valve.No need to inform me about Steam. I chose my wording well. I know the SSA inside and out... if you don't know that, you are just getting to know me. That's why I said "regardless of what current user agreements say"

[SamBC]

No need to inform me about Steam. I chose my wording well. I know the SSA inside and out... if you don't know that, you are just getting to know me. That's why I said "regardless of what current user agreements say"
There's nothing in them that causes modders (of CivV) to surrender any rights to Valve...

[Txurce]

No need to inform me about Steam. I chose my wording well. I know the SSA inside and out... if you don't know that, you are just getting to know me.

Anyone who chooses words like "bull hockey" and brags about knowing the SSA is trying to wind back the world clock to the twentieth century. But delusions of personal control are unlikely to bring about the demise of Steam or a renaissance of hard copies. We are all living in an increasingly virtual world, and there is no turning back from it.

[Artifex]

I'm ready for my sub-dermal implants!

[NitroPhantasm]

Anyone who chooses words like "bull hockey" and brags about knowing the SSA is trying to wind back the world clock to the twentieth century. But delusions of personal control are unlikely to bring about the demise of Steam or a renaissance of hard copies. We are all living in an increasingly virtual world, and there is no turning back from it.That's the party line. We're ready for Jetson scooters and space ships too. I'm not convinced that this means consumers, or fans, will not in the end bring the power of gaming companies over ownership back into this stratosphere - its about fairness (think First Sale) and privacy. I think this is hype by those in the industry.

Bull-hockey is polite. You would rather I use other language apparently.

[NitroPhantasm]

There's nothing in them that causes modders (of CivV) to surrender any rights to Valve...Precisely.