So... Strategy Gaming Online is suggesting a 3Q 2000 release for Civ III, eh?

No. Way.

I just don't see it. Yeah, Brian and his Merry Men have been chugging away on the game for awhile already, but a July-to-September release? It just isn't going to happen. This game is going to be big, and the expectations surrounding it are going to be high--the highest of any of Firaxis' projects to date, including SMAC or Sid's Dino game. Firaxis is not going to shove it out the door until it's darn good and ready.

I'm going to go out on a limb with a little gentleman's wager: 2Q 2001. We might get lucky and see it in March 2001, but no earlier than that. I'm looking forward to Civ III, but I do not expect to see it in 2000. Period.

------------------
- Biddles

------------------
- Biddles

And I'm sorry to disappoint you, but it's about to go BETA. That means 4 months until it's on the market.

I guessed at an initial release date as being set Q1 2000 (March) with a couple month delay, ending with a Late May release. And that's what OGR has it listed as, last they got any info about it.

Just a few short seasons away, and our dreams, hopes, and expectations will meet reality. And the talk about Civ4 will begin.

And I would think Q3 to Q4 of 2000 will be the targetted release of DinoCraft. A Sid Game, borrowing elements from Age of Empires 2 (Epochs/Levels)... RTS game using a modified Gett/Ant engine.

------------------
- Biddles

------------------
Rasputin The Mad Monk,
Ra Ra Rasputin, Lover of the Russian Queen

------------------
Up there it's their time, but down here it's our time.
It's our time down here!-Mikey, esteemed Goonie.

There are sites that say 2Q 2000. So we do know some fair ideas about the release date, however, I do think that because it's such a big game, it will be a bit longer, but not well into the year 2001, that's ridiculous. It's not a fricken movie!

Release dates are EASY to find. Just look them up in game rags and with game retailers. Then slide the first set you come across around by one to two quarters back, and you generally in a realistic prediction for most games. Now, that's not saying that a lot of games wouldn't do better letting the development team slide it back even further, but marketting and economic pressures force the publishers to get nasty about contract dates and obligations and not getting any more money. Or so we hear from most developers.

Jeff said that they were ABOUT to go Beta, when he was talking about them discussing which Beta method they should use for Civ3. I only saw a snippet of the entire virtual conversation, but that with other things tends to add up.

Such as, Brian had originally said they'd stencilled in Feb 2000 back before they signed an OFFICIAL deal about it, seems to me that they are on track for a May 2000 release. Back ends (delivery dates) always slide, after you get past the framework and start getting into the meat, and discover it takes more time then you originally thought to get in all the requirements.

I'm not expecting anything revolutionary. Just evolutionary. And something a lot closer to SMAC then Civ2. After all, it's SMAC that has been based on... one that's been stretched, tweeked, improved, and otherwise modified. And I'm REAL curious how they did mountains... or if they use straight SMAC terrain. Guess I'll have to wait and see...

I haven't been following this as close as other things though, so I wouldn't suggest you bet your payroll on it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Darkstarr on 12-28-1999 05:43 AM
Jeff said that they were ABOUT to go Beta

---

quote:

---

Such as, Brian had originally said they'd stencilled in Feb 2000 back before they signed an OFFICIAL deal about it

---

Still doesn't mean the 5/2000 release date is off. Now does it? I'm sure Firaxis's ...umm... assistants in distributing the game will still pressure them as strong as they can.

Not close to beta? That's good news in my book. I can wait. As long as it's a good game, I'll like it. I'll try not to expect a game too fun. Somewhere between Civ2 and Civ. That's all.

Remember, bug ridden is a matter of personal opinion. But I'm sure that Firaxis will kill all they can. They'd rather not spend 6 months chasing bugs down after the release when they could be working on something new and interesting.

Thanks for the info, Jeff! As always!

quote:

---

"There's been a lot of discussion and design work done," he said. "It needs to be more than an evolution of Civ II. We don't want a new formula, but we want it to feel like a Civ III and not a Civ II with enhancements".

---

------------------
Theben
Co-Moderator of the Civ3 Forums

quote:

---

I'd say we're still in the prototype phase, ...

---

Very good news indeed (IMO). This means the List v2 suggestions also have a chance of making it into the game.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Darkstarr on 12-28-1999 05:43 AM
We've had interesting talks with Jeff and Tim. And there are the chats with Brian around when people were asking him how long the development would take (like 18+ months), in which he laughed and said they'd be doing good to claim 9 months and end up using 12 to make it.
This message has been edited by Darkstarr

---

quote:

---

I won't engage in any wild speculation about a date, which is ALL any release date you hear about is.

---

You can go digging for where they had stated that. I'd thought it would have been 18 to 24 months timeline for things of Civ2 caliber (for a small group of people that work decently together).

However, I do have a few friends in the Game Entertainment business, and they assure me that everything they've ever been connected with had somewhere between 0 to 6 months of futzing about before the team was dragged in, and then typically 4 to 8 months to hard deadline. A couple of those games are/were decent PC sellers, so taking THEIR word for it (and I've never caught them lying to me about things programming related), I am inclined to believe that typical, and not untypical.

Now, you have to remember, that TECHNICALLY, Civ3 is been in the making since Brian Reynolds began considering how to make the sequel to Civ2. How long has that been? A designer or two CAN "futz" about, laying out basic design for a long time, I'd suppose, before the project was given a green light. And if Sid has been messing about with Dinosaurs since before he left Microprose, that means Dinosaurs has been in "concept" for a long time. When did he first consider the idea? All good apps start as thought projects by their developers... You don't get a team together and just go forward when making games, do you? We don't in the real world apps. We decide what we are after... a designer considers what's needed. Perhaps for quite a while (seconds, hours, days, weeks, months, years) before code starts. Teams formed, design's specked and tightened.

I really don't expect most games happen too differently... aside from there is a vaguer target when it's started, it's still code. Code is code. You design, test, debug, and repeat. You close in on your target, one small step per coder per pass... until the deadline that was so far off suddenly starts looming at least... {If you want to know what happens during Crunches, well, that's a Coder's Secret. I could tell you, but then you'd have to be chained to a computer here for the rest of your life...}

I hope Firaxis is not playing dirty tricks, because I'm earing from another game company that "a game is not property of developer nor customer (!) but of the distributor, that can chose when to deliver it, finished or not!"

If the quote I red on italian games magazine is correct, I think someone is going crazy.
I pray it will not happen the same with Firaxis.

Hope this clarifies!

No, but seriously, too good graphics would mean a hit on the customisability on which Civ2 mainly built its following.

Hoping you won't be fired for your effort to make CIV III "as good as deserve, using the time it needs to"