Civilization VI

[Mr Jack]

I've done over 1000 hours in Civ 5, god only knows how many hours in total when you add in the hours in Civ 1, 2, 3 and 4 as well. However, I will not be held over a barrel , no matter how good a game is, by the almost arbitrary price rises of PC games in the past 24 months. They are unnecessary price rises and the only reason why games , which for so many years on the PC were around the £35 mark have suddenly shot up, is because people pay it.

They're going up because teams continue to get larger and costs continue to get higher. It's not like games development is a particularly stable business, companies are going to the wall all the time.

Its not a matter of worth for me, its a matter of principle.

You think it's a matter of principle to not pay people who make something you like more money even if you think it is worth it?

(It reminds me of the console gaming situation from many years ago, where PC games were coming out at the £30 area and the same title on console was being thrown out at £50 because the console gamer was paying it. How we PC gamers mocked consolers for it, now we are doing the same).

Console games were more expensive because of the slice that the console makers took out of the pie.

 

[StriderX]

There's literally no need for teams to get too big, you start hitting a limit of creative leverage and and its downhill from there (Ubisoft is far too big, which is why all their games are literally far too similar).

 

[mark43]

I plan on buying it direct from Steam, I figure Fireaxis deserve the money. I've sunk getting on for 300 hours into Civ V, I expect I'll sink a similar amount of time into Civ VI. At £50, or £70 with a ticket for upcoming expansions, I think that's pretty big bargain.

Yep I agree they deserve my money, but I'll be using GMG rather than steam as they should still get my money just without the huge cut for Valve. If I didn't care though I'd probably grab it from CDKeys. The extra £15 for the deluxe seems worth it to me as I'm sure I'll want the DLC.

My only real concern is what if its a let down, I'm happy to pay this price if its as good as I'm hoping.

 

[mark43]

I've done over 1000 hours in Civ 5, god only knows how many hours in total when you add in the hours in Civ 1, 2, 3 and 4 as well. However, I will not be held over a barrel , no matter how good a game is, by the almost arbitrary price rises of PC games in the past 24 months. They are unnecessary price rises and the only reason why games , which for so many years on the PC were around the £35 mark have suddenly shot up, is because people pay it. Its not a matter of worth for me, its a matter of principle.

(It reminds me of the console gaming situation from many years ago, where PC games were coming out at the £30 area and the same title on console was being thrown out at £50 because the console gamer was paying it. How we PC gamers mocked consolers for it, now we are doing the same).

In general I agree, and I've refused to buy various games at launch because of this. But this is something I just don't want to wait for.

I wonder if one of the reasons is that more and more people hold of for the price drops these days, so they need to try to make more money at launch. Though I realise increasing the prince will just lead to even more people waiting.

 

[Mr Jack]

Yep I agree they deserve my money, but I'll be using GMG rather than steam as they should still get my money just without the huge cut for Valve. If I didn't care though I'd probably grab it from CDKeys. The extra £15 for the deluxe seems worth it to me as I'm sure I'll want the DLC.

Good point, I might order through Humble Bundle, they seem to take the smallest cut.

 

[Tombstone]

They're going up because teams continue to get larger and costs continue to get higher. It's not like games development is a particularly stable business, companies are going to the wall all the time.

You would think that some of those costs would be outweighed by the fact that when I paid £35 for a game in the past, I got a hard copy on Floppys, CD or DVD, plus a nice box, plus a nice printed manual and occassionally a nice foldout map or something too. There are no costs any more for those so you would think that would account for some balance of costs.

You think it's a matter of principle to not pay people who make something you like more money even if you think it is worth it?

I think its a matter of principle to not pay someone more for something just because I like it, yes. I like my car, I'm not going to pay the car dealer an extra £3000 just because I like it, I'm going to hunt around for the best price for the car. I like my graphics card but I'm not going to pay an extra £50 for it just because I like it, I will hunt around for the best price for the card. This is no different. Frankly, imo, in this day and age even more so than 30 years ago, hunting around for the best price for something is common sense and an extremely pragmatic approach to life fiscally speaking. But thats just me, if you want to pay full whack for it be my guest. Everyone has different principles and priorities, none are more or less right than any other.

 

[Teaf]

 

[itchy]

They're going up because teams continue to get larger and costs continue to get higher. It's not like games development is a particularly stable business, companies are going to the wall all the time.



You think it's a matter of principle to not pay people who make something you like more money even if you think it is worth it?



Console games were more expensive because of the slice that the console makers took out of the pie.

This is a totally bull statement.

Prices for PC games are rising because share holders demand bigger returns of there investments.

Making games has gone from bedrooms to boardrooms.

All that matters is the top line for games companies these days.

You can thank Alan Greenspan and Bill Clinton for that, as they deregulated the monopolies and mergers in the 90s.

Noticed how many software companies were swallowed up in the 90s and how many went bust.

All we have now is Activision, Ubi Soft, EA and well that's it really when you look at it.

The indie scene is the only place you can look to find the original bedroom game developers now, everything else is just corporate profit rules.

 

[mark43]

This is a totally bull statement.

Prices for PC games are rising because share holders demand bigger returns of there investments.

Making games has gone from bedrooms to boardrooms.

All that matters is the top line for games companies these days.

You can thank Alan Greenspan and Bill Clinton for that, as they deregulated the monopolies and mergers in the 90s.

Noticed how many software companies were swallowed up in the 90s and how many went bust.

All we have now is Activision, Ubi Soft, EA and well that's it really when you look at it.

The indie scene is the only place you can look to find the original bedroom game developers now, everything else is just corporate profit rules.

That's hardly a recent change, yet the price hikes that are being discussed are. But yeah, companies wanting to make lots of money shocker!

 

[Vimes]

Paid just over £25 for the STD edition from CD keys a while back. I assume that the general price increases the closer that it gets to launch.

Looking forward to this release.

 

[Efour]

No one remembers beyond earth?
Only a fool would pay £70 for this.
I love civ but that is ridiculous. Nothing justifies that price.

 

[arknor]

wonder if it will have drop in drop out multiplayer like civ iv did...

 

[Teaf]

His unique ability sounds awesome. Looks like Rome is going to be a mass expansion Civ again.

 

[mark43]

Agreed, Rome looks great.

 

[Tombstone]

Rome looks good ! Damnit, thats another good civ. Going to be so hard to choose.

 

[Mr Jack]

His unique ability sounds awesome. Looks like Rome is going to be a mass expansion Civ again.

Anyone else find it a bit weird that Roman's don't get aqueducts? Am I the only one who things of aqueducts as a very Roman thing? Sure, other people built them earlier but it was Rome that perfected them and took them global.

I'm really liking the way the Civs we've seen so far are shaping up, they look like they'll be more distinct than the Civs in Civ V and every one seems to have a unique feature that everyone who want.

 

[mark43]

Oh yeah, that's a good point, I do tend to associate aqueducts with them, though their replacement is good and definitely something very much associated with them. And yeah they do all seem more distinct, it feels like playing different Civs is really going to make more of a difference and affect strategy.

 

[Teaf]

They don't get an aqueduct district per-say but they do get aqueducts, they're just part of the unique "Roman Baths" district. You can still see the aqueducts at 00:53 covering a few tiles.

 

[shaf]

They're going up because teams continue to get larger and costs continue to get higher. It's not like games development is a particularly stable business, companies are going to the wall all the time.

You think it's a matter of principle to not pay people who make something you like more money even if you think it is worth it?

Console games were more expensive because of the slice that the console makers took out of the pie.

They are going up because of greed mate and nothing else. We should not try and justify it.

Civ games have loyal following and large fan base. They are trying to exploit this.

 

[Diplexbullet19]

I just had a heart attack when I went to pre-order this, first time out of all Civs where I will not be buying it. Why is the price so high? do they think because console gamers will pay it us pc gamers will? they should know the average pc gamer has twice as much IQ as console haha.