If you could bring one thing from an earlier Civ version to CIV...

[nbarclay]

The fact that people can read in spite of bad spelling doesn't mean that good spelling is unimportant. Even minor misspellings can distract readers, diverting a portion of their attention away from the message to the fact that there are spelling errors. More serious errors can cause readers to have to pause and think to try to figure out what word someone was intending to use. I don't make a fuss about spelling errors, partly out of politeness and partly because I know I'm vulnerable to making errors myself in my writing. But please don't interpret the fact that most people are polite enough not to make a fuss as evidence that only a tiny handful of people care.

[jkp1187]

Originally posted by Pinhead


Thanks, but I'm not too concerned. Only passive agressive asses like Crudwalker actually take the time to point out spelling errors in a general forum about a computer game.

I think Hauptman sums it up best in his sig...

Yep. Spelling doesn't count for anything.

[LordShiva]

Originally posted by Pinchak
Thanks, but I'm not too concerned. Only passive agressive asses like Crudwalker actually take the time to point out spelling errors in a general forum about a computer game.

*aggressive

[Pinchak]

If the occasional misspelled word distracts someone enough that they cannot focus on the message then I would suggest they visit english grammer forums instead (if they were bothered by it), or learn to read better (if they were honestly confused or distracted).

Making a seperate post simply to point out a spelling mistake does more to divert attention away from the message then the actual misspelling IMO.

[LordShiva]

*grammar

What about making separate posts to point out that making separate posts to point out spelling mistakes does more to divert attention away from the message then the actual misspelling?

[Hauptman]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
We need
- vomit
smiley.

[nbarclay]

Originally posted by Pinchak

Making a seperate post simply to point out a spelling mistake does more to divert attention away from the message then the actual misspelling IMO.

The way I look at it, the truth is (as usual) somewhere in between the two extremes. Does spelling matter? Yes. Is it worth making a fuss every time someone makes a mistake posting in a forum like this? No.

On the other hand, some spelling mistakes are more serious than others. Note that "emersion" starts with a different letter from "immersion," meaning that the kind of mental trick the Cambridge study talked about doesn't work. On the contrary, the more people rely on that kind of mental gymnastics instead of on sounding words out, the more likely they are to fail in their first effort to read the misspelled word, and to have to take extra time to try to figure out what the writer intended. In that kind of situation, I don't view it as unreasonable for someone to post a correction because if the writer keeps making the same mistake, readers will keep stumbling over it.

Edit: I just checked, and emersion actually is a word, meaning "the act of emerging." That's one of the bad things about spelling mistakes: you can actually say something different from what you intended to.

[Krill]

Originally posted by LordShiva
*grammar

What about making separate posts to point out that making separate posts to point out spelling mistakes does more to divert attention away from the message then the actual misspelling?

What we need is pork substitute.

[Pinchak]

you can actually say something different from what you intended to.

No... I ment "the act of emerging". Hey, I guess it was spelled correctly after all.

[LzPrst]

spelling correctly is what separates us from l33t-speakers.

[Saurus]

From SMAC: Paradropping submarine-transformers!
Their job was to drop close to an enemy city and then invissibly from underwater terraform the altitude so that the city eventually sunk under the waves.

(Ok, that obviously was not the most effective strategy available but still...)

[Starfarer]

I can totally see that working against a guy who isn't used to Multiplayer, though.

"...I KNEW I had a base here... where the hell did it go? And where are my mountains? What the hell happened to my blasted Rover Stack of Defensive Doom?!"

Of course, then you get the inevitable:

"HACKER!"

[Jvstin]

Originally posted by wardhali
pollution civ 3 style, with no automation to clean it up

Gah, No!

I was very happy to see that Civ 4 removed that little feature. Playing "Whack a pollution" in the end game, every game, no matter how green my Civ was, was one of the reasons why Civ III was a chore more than a pleasure.

[Blaupanzer]

I was genuinely surprised that BTS did not add an economic victory to the mix, ala SMAC. As the modern age becomes more materialistic, a victory by conquering becomes less useful to the ruling classes. BTS was intended to update the "Modern" era, right?

[Chuckles]

Palace!

And the motley crew of advisers from civ1 were fun. Changing through the times and governments, etc.