Any more expansion packs?

[Braindead]

More units and more civs is NOT my idea of an expansion.

I would gladly pay for an editor as good as the Civ2 editor.

[kring]

Originally posted by panag


hi ,

a long time ago it was mention by Firaxis that there would be an XP if the sale was good , and they met that number , so lets hope they keep promise , ......

panag, they didn't promise to make another XP. The comments were along the lines of seeing how PtW did; another XP would probably be Infog's call and not Firaxis.

I would enjoy seeing another XP.

Since E3 is coming up, hopefully, we will probably learn something about Firaxis and Infog's next project(s) by then.

[player1]

But XP which would add events and diplomacy editing, with several premade scenarios included would be fantastic.

[statusperfect]

Originally posted by The Templar


Let me guess, SimGolf 2

Hilarious... i fell of my chair when reading this one...

BTW. More leaderheads for existing civs would be nice (Napoleon, Cleopatra, etc.) both for game flavor and modding.

[Rasbelin]

Ehehehe.

[TheArsenal]

Originally posted by kring
panag, they didn't promise to make another XP. The comments were along the lines of seeing how PtW did; another XP would probably be Infog's call and not Firaxis.

So the question becomes: How is PtW doing?

[Spiffor]

Firaxians refused to tell us the sales of Civ3, which were probably much better than PtW's, so I don't think we'll know the sales of PtW. I fear PtW hasn't done well, at least in its first months in the US, since the reviews were harsh and the price has quickly fallen.

The trend seems to be different in Europe, as the price seems to remain stable, and there were some corrections already by the time PtW came out here.

My guess would be there has been enough faithful clients who bought PtW despite the bad reviews, so that a next expansion can be profitable if it has good reviews and a good image.

Also, if no expansion was planned at all, Firaxians would probably be allowed to say it. Maybe there are currently talks about the expansion, and nothing has been decided yet.

[Cruddy]

Hmm... the ONLY people with license to sell expansion packs for Civ3 are Infogrames, right? Anyone else gets sued.

So this idea of secrecy to prevent spoiler products to quash Civ3 expansions can't be right.

Here's my theory; given the huge investment both Firaxis and Infogrames put in before a single copy was sold, I would say they're sitting on a few bits and bobs that they can release if they need to make a few bucks to cover a quarterly deficit.

HOWEVER, they need to see if it's commercially viable - CIV3 sold right through its production run and new copies were produced to meet demand.

PTW, on the other hand, was heavily discounted quickly - at least in the US.

Until there's a demand, no release. So you can either.

1) Bombard Infogrames with e-mail demanding expansions - which you won't get unless PTW sells.

OR

2) Bombard Firaxis with congratulations and fervent hope that their next games are at least as good as Civ3.

Personally, I'd go for option 2.

[WarpStorm]

From all I've heard PTW met its sales expectations (roughly a quarter of Civ3's sales). Jeff Morris said that it did as well as was expected in the last chat.

[alva]

Which says alot about XP potential considering it has some although very minor issues when released.
-

[Tiberius]

I wonder though what could be included in a new XP to sell. Multiplayer was the big selling force behing PtW (or at least was supposed to be) but they can't include it again Or they could, advertising that this time will work

I know I wouldn't buy another exp. for some new civs and a scenario editor. However if they include some features from their "most wanted wish list" , then hmm, I'd interested.

[Master Zen]

well considering how Civ3 was a complete piece of garbage when it came out I was actually pleased to find PTW a very decent game for SP. MP however, which was the major selling point was a sham, I hope they don't make the same mistake with XP2.

What I fear is that this perhaps might set a precedent, that it's ok to release a crappy product which should have been, could have been almost perfect the first time around, and only decide to perfect it 2 years later. As it stands even PTW left us wanting, the editor was still incomplete, lots of new units but nowhere to use them... etc. etc. etc. I hope the future of computer gaming isn't like this, I long for the days when games were released right. Did anyone have problems with Civ1 or Civ2??? I don't think so.

Anyways, let'em release a new XP, if it's decent enough, who knows, I might buy it. If not, there are always, "alternative" ways of getting it

[Alex]

Zen, the problem is that what you fear might set a precedent is actually common practice nowadays. Games are being released without some funcionalities that will only be included in an expansion pack. They have to leave something out of the game in order to boost the sales of the XPs.

It wouldn't be hard to sell an expansion, anyway, because most fans of a particular game are always willing to pay for more of the same. I imagine that a new Civ3 expansion could add a good scenario editor plus some fantasy scenarios, just like "Fantastic Worlds" did.

[alva]

Did anyone have problems with Civ1 or Civ2??? I don't think so.

There weren't any +30.000 member forum either of course to point out all the mistakes(not to mention fewer set-ups)
I doubt people would even have noticed 10% of the (game)bugs in CIV/ptw.

(not taking about the MP part here though.)
-
IMO they would do better to drop any possible future XP's and concentrate on a well manufatured CIV4,
Any non perfect XP they release is bound to get the same, if not harsher critisism and will attract more negative attention then positive (even if it's a good one objectively), not to mention the reputation hit
Cut your losses and start over...

[Panag]

Originally posted by Cruddy
Hmm... the ONLY people with license to sell expansion packs for Civ3 are Infogrames, right? Anyone else gets sued.

So this idea of secrecy to prevent spoiler products to quash Civ3 expansions can't be right.

Here's my theory; given the huge investment both Firaxis and Infogrames put in before a single copy was sold, I would say they're sitting on a few bits and bobs that they can release if they need to make a few bucks to cover a quarterly deficit.

HOWEVER, they need to see if it's commercially viable - CIV3 sold right through its production run and new copies were produced to meet demand.

PTW, on the other hand, was heavily discounted quickly - at least in the US.

Until there's a demand, no release. So you can either.

1) Bombard Infogrames with e-mail demanding expansions - which you won't get unless PTW sells.

OR

2) Bombard Firaxis with congratulations and fervent hope that their next games are at least as good as Civ3.

Personally, I'd go for option 2.

hi ,

, they could go to court when push comes to shove , ......

they could argue that infogrames does not keep its end when it comes to for example customer support , .....

anyway , at least one XP should be on our way




have a nice day

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by alva

There weren't any +30.000 member forum either of course to point out all the mistakes(not to mention fewer set-ups)
I doubt people would even have noticed 10% of the (game)bugs in CIV/ptw.

(not taking about the MP part here though.)
-
IMO they would do better to drop any possible future XP's and concentrate on a well manufatured CIV4,
Any non perfect XP they release is bound to get the same, if not harsher critisism and will attract more negative attention then positive (even if it's a good one objectively), not to mention the reputation hit
Cut your losses and start over...

I mostly agree alva, however, being a fan of computer games since around ~1992 I recall old games were nowhere near as buggy (then again they weren't as complex).

Anyway, putting the bug issues aside, I think the overall "feel" of the game was much more satisfactory. I remember playing Civ1 for the first time and thinking, wow, what a neat little game. Ok, bad example since I had never played a civ-game before. After being a Civ1 addict I remember getting Civ2 the week it came out and not feeling dissappointed at all, it was everything I expected and more. However, when I got Civ3 I was very disappointed. I played it for about a month and then stopped playing it until the 1.29 patch came out. I didn't play it too much either until PTW was out in which finally I was satisfied with most aspects of the SP game (I didn't mind MP being buggy as I had no-one to play against at the time)

What I am getting at is why did it take over a year to get the SP game right, when there were just these little things which could have been solved from the start.

And its a shame that this happens to the Civ-franchise as it is so dear to my heart.

Anyway, I would rather wait for a refined Civ4. Civ3 is sufficiently fun and challanging in SP and MP that I don't mind there not being scenarios. Plus, I still have to find a way to beat those friggin Greeks whenever I get them as neighbors in Deity

[WarpStorm]

Originally posted by Master Zen
What I fear is that this perhaps might set a precedent, that it's ok to release a crappy product which should have been, could have been almost perfect the first time around, and only decide to perfect it 2 years later.
.
.
.
I long for the days when games were released right.

Firaxis didn't set this precedent. Far from it. It's been this way for a decade.

When were games released right on the PC? Once developers realized that they could patch games afterwards that ended real quick. Nearly every Microprose game needed major patching.

Originally posted by Master Zen
Did anyone have problems with Civ1 or Civ2??? I don't think so.

Well, Civ2 crashed hard on systems without a sound card (not at all uncommon in those days).

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by WarpStorm

Firaxis didn't set this precedent. Far from it. It's been this way for a decade.

That's still no excuse to do it, if anything being Civ players we would expect Firaxis to be the one not to do it.

When were games released right on the PC? Once developers realized that they could patch games afterwards that ended real quick. Nearly every Microprose game needed major patching.

Well, Civ2 crashed hard on systems without a sound card (not at all uncommon in those days).

Obviously games have always had problems. However, nowhere near as serious as today. Most problems of before were related to DOS configuration issues, it was DOS's archaicness, not necessarily crappy game design which caused most problems. One would think that falling to a universal standard like Windows 95 and now XP would solve those problems but no, they've actually gotten worse.

And at least the old Microprose games played well, at least on my systems. After some Win 95 games like M1 Tank Platoon and Falcon 4.0 is when Microprose started getting sloppy.

Anyway, most DOS games I ever played were quite playable without a patch ( in fact, I think I've never patched a DOS game...). I can't say the same about games today.

[WarpStorm]

In the days of DOS games where would you have downloaded a patch from? This was before the days of the web presence.

In those days you either suffered, hoped that they had a dialup number for patches (not many did), or hoped that sending in your registration card got you a patch eventually (on a few occasions I got a patch mailed out).

Computers are more diverse now than they were in the days of DOS games. It's just plain harder to program for them. In addition, customers are expecting more and more from their games. The companies have to spend time and money on things they didn't before. The programs are more likely to have bugs because of this. The problem is that budgets and schedules haven't increased proportionally. Most games are on a 18 month schedule (like they have been for years).

Master of Magic needed 3 major patches to stomp its bugs, same with Master of Orion, I could go on with other DOS games. I think you have a mild case of the glory days.

One major flaw in your thinking is that Firaxis has any major say in the plans and schedules for Civ products. They don't. They do what Infogrames wants them to do.

[Master Zen]

Originally posted by WarpStorm

Master of Magic needed 3 major patches to stomp its bugs, same with Master of Orion, I could go on with other DOS games. I think you have a mild case of the glory days.

"Mild" is an understatement

But you can't deny that "back in the days" games overall were not so screwed up as today. Or at least the games I played could be run mostly without problems, and although there were bugs they were never unplayable bugs. The way some games are released these days is just inexcusable and what I don't get is how the publisher stands to gain from releasing a buggy product, usually these games are blasted in reviews and surely hurts their sales.

And also I think most game developers these days have missed a little the true aim of computer gaming: fun. That means that flashy graphics and orchestral music are merely icing on the cake. Take the EA Sports games, each year coming out with better, more real graphics but always falling short of the past version's flaws which year by year remain. Sometimes I play a good old NES game and I find it to be much more fun than some of the garbage that's released today. And those are 8-bit graphics not 3dfx...

Unfortunately it is also the consumer's fault for falling for flashiness instead of game design.

One major flaw in your thinking is that Firaxis has any major say in the plans and schedules for Civ products. They don't. They do what Infogrames wants them to do.

I never thought that. But let's be serious, some of the SP flaws that I have criticized in other threads in the original Civ3 that were corrected in PTW surely did not need months of additional programming. There really was no excuse not to get it right from the start or at least in the next major patch but it didn't happen.

[player1]

Hmm...

What flaws exactly?

[Master Zen]

There were many little things that bothered me:

1) not being able to name units
2) (very) limited range for aircraft
3) no minimap for the editor
4) stacked movement

some others which I don't recall

fortunately PTW solved them

[WarpStorm]

One of the issues is that even tasks that would be relatively quick to fix have to be squeazed into a schedule. Firaxis only employs a few programmers on a projects (they really are a very small company). Every task that gets put in means that another gets left out. When time and money are fixed on a project, features have to be cut when the s*it hits the fan.

[Master Zen]

But not the features I want!!!!

[Odin]

[POLITICS MODE]
Thats the problem with capitalism, companies care more about $$$ than making a good game.

Project Manager: But the game isn't finished yet.

CEO: So what? We'll just make an expansion pack and make more money.
[/POLITICS MODE]

[player1]

Originally posted by Master Zen
1) not being able to name units

Could be done in 1.29f editor.
Not in usual game exempt for leader generating units.

Originally posted by Master Zen
2) (very) limited range for aircraft

This one is pretty true.

Originally posted by Master Zen
3) no minimap for the editor

It's there from 1.21f of 1.29f

Originally posted by Master Zen
4) stacked movement

It's there since 1.21f or 1.17f as I remember. PtW just added shiny little button.

Originally posted by Master Zen
some others which I don't recall

Changing year and date in scenarios?
Yep, that's PtW only.

[WarpStorm]

Originally posted by Odin
[POLITICS MODE]
Thats the problem with capitalism, companies care more about $$$ than making a good game.

Project Manager: But the game isn't finished yet.

CEO: So what? We'll just make an expansion pack and make more money.
[/POLITICS MODE]

There is some truth in this.

Having met them, I know that the guys at Firaxis are concerned about making good games. Thay are all gamers at heart.

The problem is also that running even a small company like Firaxis is expensive. They have expenses that are literally in the millions of dollars a year. You do have to be concerned with the bottom line when people's livelyhoods depend on it.

[Gramphos]

Originally posted by Spiffor
Besides, Mike Breitkreuz (the main programmer of PtW, and the big guy of the Editor since the beginning) doesn't work on Civ3 anymore.

That would mean no more editor updates.

[alva]

How much does a top programmer cost?
Any idea?

[statusperfect]

Originally posted by alva
How much does a top programmer cost?
Any idea?

Are you thinking of hiring one?