Just above the line that everybody else is quoting, the article says:
> "Despite its near-infinite replayability, Civ is not as easy to pick up and learn as many of today’s popular phone or console games. In the book, Meier reminds us that the bestselling games of 1998 were Civ 2, Warcraft II, Myst, Command & Conquer and Duke Nukem 3D. Aside from the last, all require more thought and engagement than the Candy Crushes or Fortnites that dominate gaming today."
I'm not so sure this is true. When my dad bought Civilization in 1992 (just at the start of my exams; great timing), I jumped straight in and learned everything while playing the game. My son plays Fortnite, and he sets up explicit training scenarios to practice certain skills he's decided he needs improvement in. There's plenty of engagement in modern games.
Games like Factorio demonstrate that there is still an audience for games that require thought - not just those we use to numb our brains.
...but at the same time, the gaming market has grown to the general populace, whereas in 1992, it was more niche. So maybe that niche group remained the same size, and the general population's craving for addictive numbing games has just dwarfed it.
> "Despite its near-infinite replayability, Civ is not as easy to pick up and learn as many of today’s popular phone or console games. In the book, Meier reminds us that the bestselling games of 1998 were Civ 2, Warcraft II, Myst, Command & Conquer and Duke Nukem 3D. Aside from the last, all require more thought and engagement than the Candy Crushes or Fortnites that dominate gaming today."
I'm not so sure this is true. When my dad bought Civilization in 1992 (just at the start of my exams; great timing), I jumped straight in and learned everything while playing the game. My son plays Fortnite, and he sets up explicit training scenarios to practice certain skills he's decided he needs improvement in. There's plenty of engagement in modern games.