The YIN-VEL Fund: Join the FUN!

[Dale]

I've pitched a states-based idea that many people have found quite interesting, in fact. And what have you done besides become my groupie?

Hmmm..... let's see:

1. Forgot about Civ3 and it's short-fallings.
2. Modded CTP2 so it was playable and fixed its bugs.
3. Created expanded mods to provide completely different experiences.
4. Helped Vel on Candle'Bre.
5. Created a design for a Civ-style game (which is on hold due to a project I'm working on right now).
6. Participated in the Civ4 list.
7. Even helped out Mark and his gang in Alt-civs too there for a while.
8. Other things you have no idea about.

Should I go on?

Oh, so you've done one thing in all these years? Hmmm...... I think we all know who's worked harder for the genre.

Dale

[yin26]

LOL! Ahhh, feelings hurt?

Poor little Dale is working so hard slaving away for the genre and it's Yinny who is getting offered a free copy of the game? Tell you what, I'll send you an autographed copy of some underpants I just soiled laughing at your hilarious public confession.

NOTE: I just noticed Dale even has something about me in his signature! Christ. Listen, we'll never have a relationship, and --no-- I won't come visit your house to teach you how to play Civ, either.

NOTE 2: Also from Dale's signature:

Games Programmer for hire......

Maybe you should actually spend your time trying to get that job rather than crying about broken dreams on Apolyton? Just a thought.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by yin26
I've stopped blindly believing in a game simply because it has Sid's name on it.

Yup, instead you're blindly disbelieving in a game just because it has Sid's name on it. I was (and still am) every bit as critical of Civ3 as you were, if not more so, I just didn't bash people over the head with that over and over and over and over... I've been very sceptical of Civ4 since the start as well, but frankly there's not much to be sceptical about. Contrary to Civ3, we've so far by and large only heard good things about Civ4. The only real concern one could have right now is what the pushed up release date will do to the overall polish, but they've been polishing this game for 2 months already and the date is only pushed up a week or two, so personally I'm fairly confident there.

People like CyberShy who blindly have faith that Civ4 will kick ass no matter what are not to be taken seriously, but neither are people like you who blindly believe the game will suck. IMO neither type of person provides any kind of useful role to the community, the constant repetition of the same old arguments over and over again (from both sides) is just cluttering the forums.

IMO the most useful contributions at this point are coming from people posting links to new articles and previews and stuff, people like Geomodder, Platypus Rex and hordes of Settlers. They provide the facts and let others form their own opions. If anyone in this forum deserves a reward (which is what I would regard a free copy of Civ4), it's people like them



But if there's one thing I agree with, it's that this all shouldn't be taken too seriously, in the end it's just a game...

[yin26]

Hey, I never said the game would suck. I just said it would be Civ 2.7

[Dale]

Yin:
How little you know.

Oh, and what broken dreams have I spoken about?

[Harovan]

I rarely agree with Locutus, but this was well written.

[yin26]

I agree with Locutus as well, which is why if anybody cares to, you'll see I've limited my critical postings to a few threads over the past few years. And the thrust of my argument, again, has never been: "Civ4 sucks because Sid made it." No, it's been, based on what we've been told, I think (yes, opinion) that we have Civ 2.7 on our hands. Sure I'm disappointed, but many gamers said "You know what, I like the familiarity of it. It feels like home." Great! Does nothing for me, of course, and I don't mind starting a thread or two about it.

In the end, though, it's a forum. If you don't like the give and take, the extremes from one side or the other, start a $1.99/min. chat line and call yourself.

[Robert]

Locotus: People like CyberShy who blindly have faith that Civ4 will kick ass no matter what are not to be taken seriously

Thanks for that
No sure what I did to suddenly get such a lable though
I'm cheering happily over any good news I hear. That's something else then blindly believing in the truth of civ!

I refuse it to be called the opposite of yin

Uh, unless that gives me a free box of civ as well of course

[CanuckSoldier]

Originally posted by yin26
I agree with Locutus as well, which is why if anybody cares to, you'll see I've limited my critical postings to a few threads over the past few years. And the thrust of my argument, again, has never been: "Civ4 sucks because Sid made it." No, it's been, based on what we've been told, I think (yes, opinion) that we have Civ 2.7 on our hands. Sure I'm disappointed, but many gamers said "You know what, I like the familiarity of it. It feels like home." Great! Does nothing for me, of course, and I don't mind starting a thread or two about it.

In the end, though, it's a forum. If you don't like the give and take, the extremes from one side or the other, start a $1.99/min. chat line and call yourself.

I find your opinion that this will just be Civ 2.7 ironic at the very least, as the majority complaint from a vocal minority of the MP community is that CIV is NOT just a bug free updated version of there beloved C3C, intact with all of there time proven strategies :-/ It seems that not matter what Firaxis does there will be people that complain :-?

CS

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by CyberShy
I refuse it to be called the opposite of yin

Uh, unless that gives me a free box of civ as well of course

Be careful: you could suddendly discover you have to eat the CD / DVD in change, if the game is not as advertised.

Apolyton forum: there are wild lions out there! Watch your shoulder! Or at least take a warrior for escort

[hexagonian]

For lack of a better term, Yin26 is merely the 'yin' of the yin-yang world of computer game reviews, and as such, is needed to achieve TRUE balance and harmony.

Looking forward to ALL of the reviews, as I will have at least a month before I even think about getting the game...

[Robert]

CanuckSoldier, the CS abbreviation already belongs to me

[yin26]

I find your opinion that this will just be Civ 2.7 ironic at the very least, as the majority complaint from a vocal minority of the MP community is that CIV is NOT just a bug free updated version of there beloved C3C, intact with all of there time proven strategies :-/ It seems that not matter what Firaxis does there will be people that complain :-?

I do agree that people will complain no matter what. I don't think, though, that making people have to play at least a *little* differently makes this a full version step. O.K. Maybe Civ 2.8.

Yin26 is merely the 'yin' of the yin-yang world of computer game reviews, and as such, is needed to achieve TRUE balance and harmony.

FINALLY! Truth and understanding!

Certainly when I read reviews, I start with the 4 or 5 out of 10 stars. Most of the time the complaints are totally useless ("It broke my monitor!"), but sometimes there are tell-tale signs that I don't even need to bother reading the positive ratings ("On hard level, all I did was build city after city after city with two spearman in each town --no other military-- and within a few hours every other civ started gifting me gold not to attack them.").

The same for the 9 or 10 out of 10 star reviews. A lot of that is useless, too ("I haven't even opened the box yet but can tell you this is best game ever!"), though sometimes revealing in a positive sense ("I used to beat Deity routinely. I just lost --badly-- on Monarch...and I've been playing non-stop for a week.").

Then, I suppose, law of averages dictates that more often than not it will be the 7 - 8 star ratings that show the best balance: "I can beat Monarch without much trouble, but the process is an egaging one, and there are usually moments of real decision making." So when I predict that we will have Civ 2.7, I imagine it would deserve a 7 or maybe (by the expansion) an 8 or even 9.

And if this still sounds too critical to people, suck it up!

[Robert]

Yin, I'll ask you again, if civ IV only qualifies for civ 2.8, what games do qualify for a 'round' sequel number?
And why does civ2 qualify to be civ2 instead of civ 1.5?
What are the huge difference between civ1 and civ2 that aren't available in civ3 or civ4?

Is doom3 not really doom1.3 (doom with improved graphics)
Is the sims2 not reqally the sims1.2 (more of the same with better graphics)

explain how your sequel system works

[CanuckSoldier]

Originally posted by CyberShy
CanuckSoldier, the CS abbreviation already belongs to me

Well I guess you are just going to have to learn to share :-P This maybe heresy here but the Civ community is more that just 'poly :-P

Cheers CS