Customization?

[Corvakhan]

One thing that has disappointed me over the years with the various renditions of this franchise is the lack of customization. I really hope Civ VI addresses this. It seems like with every new release people are destined to have some type of emotional response towards the choice of civs included in the game. This could be alleviated, to some degree, with the implementation of an in-game customization tool/engine.

When you look at the success of other games on the market at providing an in-depth customization tool, it’s hard to think of reasons why it would be so over-looked by the Civ franchise. Afterall, this is a game that challenges you to re-write history. It doesn’t need to be the primary focus of the game, but can and should exist as a tool within the options menu for players to experiment with and enhance their game. Sports franchises have the ability to put you in the game by scanning your face and reproducing an avatar. In Tropico, you can customize and create a character from head to toe. In Europa Universalis 4 you can completely create a custom faction; you can design the flag, pick your colours, name your leader, choose cultural and religious leanings, assign map graphics, etc. – all in game! Without having to mod or rely on others to mod for you.

I appreciate the community of modders out there that have continued to come up with extremely creative mods – they keep the civ games fresh as the years go on… but for those who cannot or do not wish to learn to mod, build a feature in game. I can literally have my face on an avatar and posterize LeBron James with a vicious dunk, but I still have to play as Queen Elizabeth of England in a Civ game? Lame. What about this? Civ gives me the opportunity to create a rendition of William Wallace/Scotland in game, so I can figuratively posterize the Queen of England as I re-write history? Awesome. I have a feeling I am about to be let down in this regard, again.

[Darkwing]

Originally posted by Corvakhan:

I have a feeling I am about to be let down in this regard, again.

You won't be let down if you stop expecting Civ to be something it's not. Also, almost all those games you mentioned with in-depth customization options have otherwise questionable quality throughout the rest of the game (or a lack of gameplay depth). If we continue to get the same, high quality installments that we've been getting and that means leaving advanced customization up to the vibrant modding community then I think that's a fair trade between balancing production costs and quality assurance with pandering to the clammorings of the fanbase.
All in all, I think it would be nice but I'd caution against pushing too hard for that level of customization in a Civ game if it in any way hampered the efforts put into the rest of the experience.

[Corvakhan]

Originally posted by Thunder:

Originally posted by Corvakhan:

I have a feeling I am about to be let down in this regard, again.

You won't be let down if you stop expecting Civ to be something it's not.

I certainly do not expect Civ 6 at 89 - 90.00 CAD to be more similar to Civ 5 Brave New World than something new altogether. And for that money, I think it is fair to have a measure of customization, that does not depend on how well you can write code. Civ celebrates cultural achievements of few while isolating many, having customization tool will help gamers feel more included in the franchise - something that would likely expand the fanbase and enhance brand loyalty.

I would also aruge that my player modes in sports franchise, and various MMOs have a deep level of game play and the experience is more enriching/rewarding when it is your creation that is successful.

What I am talking about adding to the game does not take away from the depth of the game play. The code already exists in the file folders, modders exploit this, what I am asking for is a way to bring that to the table for those who do not want to spend hours copying and pasting and checking lines of code in order to play their rendition of Canada, Scotland, Congo, Peru, Hawaii, Thunderland, the XYZ republic etc.

Customization also adds to an interesting online arena where every opponent is dynamic and unique. Another bonus of an in-game customization engine is that you do not have to rely on players having the same versions of the same mods downloaded to add a different element to the game because everyone has the same core files and all game data is uploaded at the start of the match.

I do not want to play the same ol merry-go-round CIV game. I want to truly create a CIV, from scratch and write history. CIV seems to want to frame the experience and sell a slightly different mechanic each time its packaged. If you want me to be invested as a player, emotionally and financially you have to give me something to invest in. I am tired of playing Napoleon, Elizabeth, Isabella - regardless of the new mechanics, I want to play something that is my own.

[Darkwing]

It sounds like you just want to play something else, to be honest.
Also, this:

Originally posted by Corvakhan:

Civ celebrates cultural achievements of few while isolating many,

is quite a statement.
Not being all-inclusive, for a wide number of reasons, is a far cry from isolating someone else's culture.

[Corvakhan]

Originally posted by Thunder:

It sounds like you just want to play something else, to be honest.
Also, this:

Originally posted by Corvakhan:

Civ celebrates cultural achievements of few while isolating many,

is quite a statement.
Not being all-inclusive, for a wide number of reasons, is a far cry from isolating someone else's culture.

No -- you just seem to miss the point, or you just do not agree with my suggestion. No one is replacing the Civ game or built in Civs or negating future DLC. Its adding a tool to enhance the game-play that much more for those who wish to have their own true civ.

It really shouldnt be that hard to do -- especially for a large studio partnership like firaxis and 2k games. Bundle together a generic icon generator, generic units, buildings, plug and play traits with colour selections and if you really want to be ambitious throw in a 3d generator for a leader avatar. This change would also enhance the mods that would be available after the fact because most of the game files are already written, which will free up time to focus on custom 3d models, artwork, and animations to add to their custom civ files.

With how simple it could be, and how inclusive it could make the game, the fact the same customization modes have been around for decades now (some even in the same genre as Civ), and with Civ still completely ignoring the chance to improve this short-coming in the game... it does isolate people who buy the game who feel they are consistently misrepresented, under-represented, or not represented at all. And the attitude towards other gamers in forums when suggesting that their culture or civ be represented as a playable faction in future DLC or mods only adds to that isolation or prejudice. It's "easy" to side step the problem altogether by adding a little more functionality to the game. Maybe you don't see it that way, and if so, we will have to agree to disagree.

[abonamente]

Advocating this for ages. Why is Civilization the only unfortunate exception among all those 4xTBS/RTS allowing me advanced faction customization? There is customization in game, I know - the social policies, religions and ideologies do exactly that. But why can't I choose certain faction traits, name, title, banner etc. before starting a new game?

The only reason I can think of is a financial one - probably they just want to get their money through civilizations+scenarios DLC, in time, since a higher initial selling price for the game, although fair in my opinion, would meet a fierce opposition. I mean - so often I can see threads about how could a 1 year old game still sell at the initial price, no wonder a developer or publisher would try a different business model.

Still, I wish they thought of something else and allow me to choose my faction's traits and start as {name_your_tribe}, then, after certain events and choices and during certain ages, do {rename_your_tribe}. This would be consistent with the history of the world too. There were no Portugal, America, France etc. 6000 years ago. They became that in time. And anyway they are/were not what MY civilization is when I guide it through the millenia in game.


By the way: this kind of approach, with a few new game mechanics, would also account for some present or probable developments and entities, like the European Union.

[Corvakhan]

I always thought the stone age or nomadic period of the game could be elaborated -- adding features like you have mentioned could be built into a length of game option... like epic for example.

... maybe it could be like you said where you literally evolve from a nomad through to a city state to political union of city states as a country then build to form an empire from there. Civ would become a pretty massive game -- but going into Civ VII i think they have a proven fan base with a tolerance to price points if theres a long term commitment to a game that is much greater in scope... in all aspects...

There doesnt really seem to be anything epic about taking a few more turns to research pottery