Sign on Options
Theme:
To Dark

GDC 2010 Keynote Address: Sid Meier (PC)

  • 21,187 Views
  • Posted Mar 12, 2010

Check out Sid Meier's GDC 2010 keynote address.

loading... Flash Player 10 is required to watch this video.

GameSpot on YouTube

Related Videos

  1. GDC 2010 Keynote Address: Sid Meier

    Watch this video
    Check out Sid Meier's GDC 2010 keynote address.
    Posted Mar 12, 2010 | 53:58 | 21,187 Views

  2. News Update: Thursday, Februaty 18, 2010

    Watch this video
    Get your GameSpot news update for Thursday, February 18th!
    Posted Feb 18, 2010 | 1:59 | 9,134 Views

  3. Sid Meier's Civilization V Announcement Trailer

    Watch this video
    Sid Meier brings you the next chapter in the Civilization series. Check out the announcement trailer!
    Posted Feb 26, 2010 | 1:29 | 79,772 Views

  4. GDC 2010 Keynote Address: Sid Meier

    Watch this video
    Sid Meier delivers his GDC 2010 keynote address, "The Psychology of Game Design"
    Posted Mar 12, 2010 | 53:58 | 10,479 Views

  5. Crosshairs: Halo: Reach, Civilization V

    Watch this video
    We civilise some spartans with a look at Halo: Reach's multiplayer beta, chat to Firaxis about what's new in Civilization V, and check out the action at the Alienware Clan Challenge 2010 Modern Warfare Finals in Sydney. Plus a prototype 3DS and a goat!
    Posted Apr 22, 2010 | 29:52 | 8,050 Views

Upload Your Own Videos

Watch cool and crazy videos from GameSpot users just like you, and vote for your favorites! Subscribers and users level 10 and higher get to upload their own.

Choose your preferred download format:

Hi-Res H.264 MP4
740.8MB 
Sign In
Lo-Res MPEG
566.6MB 
Sign In
Lo-Res IPOD / PSP
155.2MB 
Sign In
close [x]

Use these links to add the GameSpot player to another site (html) or your GameSpot blog (bbcode).

  • BBCODE:

  • 640PX WIDE:

  • 480PX WIDE:

close [x]

42 Comments

  • xxxDirtyJoexxx

    Posted Apr 4, 2010 5:33 am GMT

    His right about the cheating part it spoils the sense of accomplishment witch is essential for a good game experience. I always to play a game without cheats then experiment with cheats.
    Its lots of fun using no reload cheat in Battlefield Bad Company 2 to blow up buildings, i could do it all day and it never gets boring(well not yet).

  • velimirius

    Posted Apr 4, 2010 5:02 am GMT

    Well said Sid.

  • madmenno

    Posted Apr 3, 2010 5:41 am GMT

    Sid is the master of replayablity. His games have loads of combination, paths, strategies wich make up for (almost?) endless gameplay.

  • JHG6784

    Posted Mar 25, 2010 10:32 am GMT

    the whole core of the odds was miss you can keep 3/1 4/1 and so on but you can't have the 1 win back to back to back which has occur to myself a million times playing civ games.

  • FarmFreshDX

    Posted Mar 24, 2010 7:28 pm GMT

    The random factor was his best point. It is easy to see paranoia and saying the game cheats, and it's always no fun when you know the game actually has stacked itself against you. Play Mario Kart Wii or Double Dash on 150cc and you'll see the computer actually time spiny shells and lightning bolts to hit you as you jump a gap. It's just plain frustrating.

  • ermhm

    Posted Mar 23, 2010 4:56 am GMT

    he makes some good points

  • thestrateger

    Posted Mar 21, 2010 12:07 pm GMT

    Tooooooo long!

  • Nsae_Comp

    Posted Mar 16, 2010 5:57 pm GMT

    And he gets the thing with the odds totaly wrong!
    Because it is a misunderstanding.
    Gamers do not read these values as odds, at least I never did in the last 15 years or something I have played CIV.
    I always thought about these values as strength!
    Thus a unit with the strength of 20 is indeed much stronger than 10, and not only has a double chance of winning!
    But as it seams I always misunderstood the rules of Civ, which are in the background.
    Thus it is very important to tell the gamer why something is happening, so that the gamer can master it!
    But to be fair, he seems to talk about the values shown in CIV Revolution, there they are marked as odds, I think, and I never had a problem with these values.

    AND!!!
    Games are not about WINNING, it is all about MASTERING, and CIV should be the best example for that!

    So he should maybe use his gamer-listening strategies on himself, and do not take everything as totaly 1:1. He should maybe just play Civ, because with that he does a great job (but in my point of view fails since Civ 2 and Alpha Centaury to take it into the next levels, even though he made some interesting steps in CIV 4 and Revolution, but he still plays it save).

    So do not listen.
    But instead PLAY.
    And listen to your playing-habits/love.
    Because the playing is ultimately free, and the game is its border, its habitat, dream and world, not any desing rules are the limits for gaming!
    A game is a composition, one of the most individual ones, and still interacting with a epic shared surrounding called game/program/play!
    (The most individual one and most interactive and epically shareable thing/play, is still life itself. That I have learned most defenitly from games!)

  • Nsae_Comp

    Posted Mar 16, 2010 5:42 pm GMT

    Civilization is the most addictive game, and ignites very much your fantasy, I love it for that!
    BUT it is definetly NOT the only one which is memorable, there are so many games out there which are memorable and do not fulfill Sids statements.

    AND there is a lot in Civ I hate since the first game, and these are things he mentions as positive.

    So Sids is no question a genius, and I have not played any game more, and more dedicated then CIV (except Master of Orion), but his game is getting a lot wrong, and and his statement does NOT set laws-of-game-nature!

    Yours Nsae,
    Thanx Sid for the most precious game hours/days/weeks....!!!

  • GymFox

    Posted Mar 15, 2010 9:35 pm GMT

    great talk

  • green_dominator

    Posted Mar 15, 2010 10:52 am GMT

    The thing about losing in games goes something like this.....when I lose to the AI I ask what did I do? sometimes I'm just low on health or I wasn't equipped properly for the fight, whatever it was I'm okay with it so long as I can learn from it or take something away from it to use later....
    When it's against human players sometimes I get pissed but it's more at myself than others, I'm not the type to want to win 100% of the time but if I can get a win or a few frags in here and there I'm okay.....
    The thing about game design I hate is when I do everything that I can to make my character stronger and the games enemies come in dropping nukes and stuff I'm like "F" this man.....It's one thing to lose a battle due to bad planning or tactics or not being strong enough to handle it but to be slapped in the face, I take offense at that, Not that I'm blaming Sid Meier or his games for anything, he's a genius....I'm just making a general comment on games as a whole.....

  • deviant74

    Posted Mar 15, 2010 9:12 am GMT

    Sid Meire you are very smart man. There is always some good to be found from any disaster. If you put them in the game then I need to see the good that came from it. If a plague hits then the Doc's. are working double time to learn what is going on, and money donations from the people is pouring in with my money making my Doc's the best in the world. And the doc's will give me a unit back after 3 were killed off from now on. A disaster hit's a Neighboring Country I help them and they give me a tech. 300 men put a hurt to my army only happens once every 7000 years. Not 1 time every 100 battles. If I see that the land is set up just right for 300 to do some damage to an army and I do it perfectly then yes I want to call my mom and tell her how smart her kid is.

  • grgcucu

    Posted Mar 15, 2010 8:15 am GMT

    @ metalkid9 There are natural disasters! Random events like tornadoes, global warming, volcano erruptions, floods, etc... Play the game first and then say what Civ hasn't

  • Graddu

    Posted Mar 15, 2010 5:45 am GMT

    Who the hell are all these dumb gamers that get their wishes fulfilled? They're making the games worse by letting you dumbing it down for them... all they care about is winning and all it comes down to is who's yelling the loudest... For instance when he talkes about that they take into account previous battles when calculating the next battle to please the player, that's just bad math and doesn't make any sense.

    @ iron_zealot7531 & SSG_Troyer I totally agree with you.

  • metalkid9

    Posted Mar 14, 2010 4:18 pm GMT

    I still think they should add natural disasters in Civ. I don't see how it would worsen the experience. Sometimes a game gets predictable, not that it is, but that's just my opinion.

  • iron_zealot7531

    Posted Mar 14, 2010 6:00 am GMT

    @ SSG_Troyer

    No kidding. I really have to wonder about the people Sid apparently got to play test his games. I'm sure that he was just exaggerating to make a point, but he really made them sound stupid and childish. Randomized research is fine if it's implemented well, and moral dilemmas or morally challenging decisions are much more interesting then an obvious good vs evil dichotomy.

  • iron_zealot7531

    Posted Mar 14, 2010 5:56 am GMT

    @ jeremiah06

    "You just don't know how much it sucks to build up this great thing only to lose it in the end."

    Wow...are you freaking kidding me? You don't think I've ever lost a game of Civilization? When I first started playing Civ i would reload the game every time I lost a battle, but I eventually learned that this ruined the fun and the strategy of the game, and I stopped doing it.

    Sid's point was that he was protecting you FROM YOURSELF. Meaning that what you think you want is not what you actually want. Especially in a strategy game of all things.

    If the possibility of losing makes you dislike a game, then you shouldn't be playing games. Either that, or stick with My Little Pony for the DS.

  • jeremiah06

    Posted Mar 14, 2010 3:15 am GMT

    @iron_zealot7531

    As someone who's done that sort of thing I have to disagree. If I'm so inclined to want to "cheat" the system so that I win everytime then that means for that instance I did want to win everytime. It gives me the player more reason to go back and play the game more. You just don't know how much it sucks to build up this great thing only to lose in the end. Some days I might want that possibility but some days I wont. Think about it. Its a lot of hassle to have to stop reload and try again after every failure. Why would I put myself through all that if it wasn't what I wanted? Also "well just make it so you win everytime" Isn't right either because sometimes I expect to lose which is why I'd play the game normally. Taking away my ability to abuse the system isn't going to make me experience because then you'll have me taking myself out of the experience with all the complaining I'd start dong. FFXIII has that problem for me. I spend so much time complaining about being forced to experience the game a certain way that I'm taken out of the experience anyway.

  • jeremiah06

    Posted Mar 14, 2010 1:35 am GMT

    I think It would've been awesome to have some random natural disasters thrown in. When looking at the potential for a city(with a settlers) it could show probability of a natural disaster(tectonic activity, adjacent oceans, active volcanoes etc.). Skill is important but luck should play some type of a factor. Also the ability to change the disaster settings before a match(none at all, more frequent, less possible) would be necessary.

Sid Meier's Civilization V

Sid Meier's Civilization V BoxshotEnlarge the boxshot
Not Following
Follow
Add to List

Follow for the latest news, videos, & tips from experts & insiders

GameSpot Fuse

    Game Stats

    Close
    Also on:
    Civilization V Navigation