More crashes with 1.27f

[Asmodeus]

Hi,

Since installing the UK version of 1.27f I have had worse problems trying join games than before

Not only does session fail to launch most of the time but I have to abort the whole program via task manager as it no longer returns to the main screen.

I suspect most of the failed launchs are the result of fukwitted players trying to join a game without the patch (may they rot in hell) but what Firaxis were thinking when they omitted coding any version checking is beyond me. Any donkey knobber programmer should have put that in.

And no it isnt hardware related.

2.66 GHz PIV, 512MB ram, 64MB nVidia, Win XP SP1, all latest drivers and DX9.

I'm so fed up with Firaxis and Infragreed that I am going to mail them poo in envelopes

[David Murray]

Merde par avion?

[ThePlagueRat]

Merde!!!
Why do I get that froggy messagebox when I try to launch the game?

[dexters]

That 64MB Nvidia card (I'm guessing its the Geforce 4 MX)is a POS. It's not really even based on the GeForce 4 chipset. It's a marketing ploy on nVidia's part.

Replace it with something better, like ATI Radeon based cards or the new nVidia GeForce FX budget card. I can't remember the exact product name, but it competes with the Radeon 9200.

[Paddy]

Bugger

[Panag]

Re: More crashes with 1.27f

Originally posted by Asmodeus
Hi,

Since installing the UK version of 1.27f I have had worse problems trying join games than before

Not only does session fail to launch most of the time but I have to abort the whole program via task manager as it no longer returns to the main screen.

I suspect most of the failed launchs are the result of fukwitted players trying to join a game without the patch (may they rot in hell) but what Firaxis were thinking when they omitted coding any version checking is beyond me. Any donkey knobber programmer should have put that in.

And no it isnt hardware related.

2.66 GHz PIV, 512MB ram, 64MB nVidia, Win XP SP1, all latest drivers and DX9.

I'm so fed up with Firaxis and Infragreed that I am going to mail them poo in envelopes

hi ,

and you have tried a reinstall , ........


why dont you mail them and ask for help , ........


have a nice day

[Asmodeus]

Re the comments on video card - that hasnt changed since ugrading the patch - so unless 1.27f has new ways of calling the DX9 component then it's not hardware related. The card is (IIRC) nVidea MX460 and yes I know they are nothing special - although good enough for my favourite game Wolfenstein ET with all graphic options ramped up to max on a 32 player server.

But I've come to the conclusion that CIV3 should not try to be an internet based game but concentrate on being a SP Strategy game. There are a number of reasons for this (not just my most recent gripe).

It's a turn based game trying to work in a realtime environment with the added factor of lag (and boy this game lags compared to many others).

A typical game (if played in the spirit of the original game) should last many hours - more than one sitting in most cases - certainly more than most people (except me!) can play for online.

New versions of the game, Regicide, Princess etc try to address this by creating a faster sudden death form of game. Why??? Why take the one worst feature of the game (very simplified combat system slightly less complex than moving chess pieces) and make that the object of the game? I just cannot see the point in playing these 'speed civ' games with 10 second turn time and 1 hour game limit.

Diplomacy is very difficult in most cases as nearly all servers have short turn time limits - there is no time to effectively negotiate except for very quick tech trades.

If anyone gets disconnected the whole game has to be restarted with the usual problems of trying to find everyone again try to get the session started without hanging, find the correct save game file then watch the fun and games as everyone clicks the wrong civ until the whole thing is a confused irritating mess.

In short, for me anyway, Civ3 MP just seems so unwieldly compared to the other online games I play - and it really isnt worth the effort. I will still enjoy SP games however. Fortunately the one good thing about the game - smart AI - make this an enjoyable challenge and it has a huge ammount of replay value. But for internet play, I'll stick to ET.

[Mad Bomber]

Why don't you try PBEM games? Sure you don't have multiple turns in one setting but the trade off is a better, more complete game than internet games.

[Paddy]

I agree with "The Mad Bomber"

[Asmodeus]

Originally posted by Mad Bomber
Why don't you try PBEM games? Sure you don't have multiple turns in one setting but the trade off is a better, more complete game than internet games.

I may well do that! If I can persuade some mates to give it a go.

[syngensmyth]

Haven't been here in awhile. Is there any good reason for a single player to patch 1.27? My game works perfectly IMHO and I hate to screw it up, which usually does not stop me from doing it anyway, of course.

My last upgrade to PW only worked when I found the no cd exe and used it, patch would not find cd and I could never fix the problem.

[Solver]

Asmodeus,

Bear in mind that Firaxis have always said that Civ 3 is a SP game. And yes, you're right, MP isn't as enjoyable. It's all on the surface, though. Civ is supposed to be played with long games, as you said, several sittings. My games usually are complete in 4 days, say. Unless you happen to play online for 16 hours a time, you're not going to have enjoyable MP games finished, quite likely.

The "quick games" are for those who do enjoy Civ 3, but really want to make it a quicker experience... although to me, those game types are way too military oriented. Actually, I'd rather play an RTS game instead...

[Panag]

Originally posted by Solver
Asmodeus,

Bear in mind that Firaxis have always said that Civ 3 is a SP game. And yes, you're right, MP isn't as enjoyable. It's all on the surface, though. Civ is supposed to be played with long games, as you said, several sittings. My games usually are complete in 4 days, say. Unless you happen to play online for 16 hours a time, you're not going to have enjoyable MP games finished, quite likely.

The "quick games" are for those who do enjoy Civ 3, but really want to make it a quicker experience... although to me, those game types are way too military oriented. Actually, I'd rather play an RTS game instead...

hi ,

well MP can be made more enjoyable with some small rules , some people for example play the game till a certain era without making war , etc , ......

have a nice day

[Asmodeus]

Originally posted by syngensmyth
Haven't been here in awhile. Is there any good reason for a single player to patch 1.27? My game works perfectly IMHO and I hate to screw it up, which usually does not stop me from doing it anyway, of course.

My last upgrade to PW only worked when I found the no cd exe and used it, patch would not find cd and I could never fix the problem.

Well I have for sometime been struggling to make Civ3 MP work - I dont like to give up easy! I have hosted a few successful games (1.21f) and played at least a dozen or so on other servers - but since upgrading I dont see any improvement and as I griped about above, previously if a host cancelled game or out of sync occured i could exit back to the main menu ok - now I have to crash it with Task Manager - not a very professional way to end a program.

There are very few changes to SP in 1.27f that I am aware of, however I have no problems playing it in SP regardless of how bigger map i have. This is a netcode issue that gets triggered by cancelled/crashed games in MP. As for whether it's best to upgrade - as a rule I always do upgrade (except betas) but in this instance appart from not being able to play online on any 1.27f servers - I dont see any great reason to upgrade.