If Blizzard can do it why can't Firaxis?

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by Case
Don't forget that Civ2 contained some serious bugs - Microprose had to issue patches to fix the unit stats and allow players to create their own tech's and units.

Civ II had to be patched, it is true, but the 1 player game played perfectly and stayed stable right out of the box for most if not all players. That is the sign of good testing. Tweaking a point off attack or adding a point on defence is minor stuff. That the customisation tool was less well tested is a pain, but forgivable. You should be playing the basic game for a couple of months before reaching for the custom tools! Now that multiplayer and mods are the norm rather than the exception we ought to be able to expect the same level of rigorous testing to be applied to those elements of the game before release, and I'm sure they know this. The reviewers will certainly focus far more on those elements than they did 5 years ago.

I don't want the game to be released any later than it has to be, but adverts or no adverts, if it comes out in October/November I will be worried they have succumbed to the temptation to rush it.

[Hasdrubal]

The odd bug wouldn't bug me. As long as the bugs don't render the game unplayable in a ToT-fashion , I'm fine with them. We can track them down. How could a bughunt by a handfull of programmers possibly compare with what this crowd of hundreds can and will find? If the company were to release a bug-free game, that would only mean that they have wasted their valuable time. Firaxis shouldn't waste their time on bughunting, they should devote their effort to play-testing. And more testing, improving, playing and fine-tuning until they get it just right.
On a side note: I hope that they will keep the financial controller at bay by telling him that it is the creative team that makes or breaks a company, and not the sticking to any tight schedules or release dates.

[death_head]

Originally posted by Hasdrubal
The odd bug wouldn't bug me.

Bad pun alert!

[Swissy]

The situation at Blizzard is quite different than Firaxis'. Blizard is a Publisher/developer, they do everything in-house, they control the money. Firaxis is a Developer, they have no money. They have been given a contract to produce a product, which probably has a timelimit atached. They do not produce the product within a specified amount of time there are probable contractual remedies; LESS MONEY at pay-off time.

Some of the best software comes from companies that keep everything in-house, but only if they are in great finanical health. Blizzard did not always hold product until they were nearly perfect. Now with three great series under their belt they can do so. Firaxis on the other hand, is dependent on outside sources for their funding. Could it be that Sid Golf was necessary to keep Firaxis financially sound until the Civ3 pay-off? The Sim franchise is EA's and Firaxis has a long relationship with EA(SMAC and Sid's Cival War stuff). I think Civ3 is the first time Firaxis has developed a game for anyone but EA.

So don't compare Blizzard to Firaxis, nor should you expect Firaxis to act the way Blizzard does. They are two companies that are on the opposite ends of the software industry spectrum; ones that completely hold their fate in their hands, and those beholden to others.

[korn469]

Here are my conspiracy theories...

The situation at Blizzard is quite different than Firaxis'. Blizard is a Publisher/developer, they do everything in-house, they control the money. Firaxis is a Developer, they have no money. They have been given a contract to produce a product, which probably has a timelimit atached. They do not produce the product within a specified amount of time there are probable contractual remedies; LESS MONEY at pay-off time.

Swissy this is untrue...as far as i know and please feel free to correct me if i am wrong...Blizzard used to be (or were they just a part of?) Davidson & Associates, which was in turn bought by the french corporation Havas Interactive Inc., which also bought Sierra...which was owned by Universal? (is Havas now called Vivendi Universal Publishing?) i think that is correct, but i'm not exactly sure. Is that correct? So if you had of said Havas controls the money...because since Blizzard Entertainment is a wholly owned subsiderary of Havas Interactive, Havas controls the purse strings...if they wanted to Havas could lay off the entire Blizzard staff...Havas is a large corporation and more than likely a public company in France so when it comes right down to it the CEO controls the money outflows at Havas (of which Blizzard is a part) and the CEO is controlled by investors in Havas, who put their money in that company to make money

Jeff Briggs is CEO of Firaxis games and he also happens to the executive producer of civ3...Firaxis is not a public company (i think it is a partnership if i remember correctly) so if Jeff Briggs wanted to say...hey we will take a short term hit in profits for the long term benefit of the company, because a well done civ3 will sell many more copies than a shoddy civ3 that we rushed out the door to make an artificial limit...then nobody could fire Jeff Briggs...

As for their contract we don't know what it says and i can guarantee than nobody from firaxis is going to post it here...I would also go to say that with all of Jeff and Sid's years in the gaming business that they probably know how to negociate a contract that won't screw them over, and I would also go as far as to say that when it comes to Civ3 that the words Sid Meier's Civ III are worth a great deal more than Wes Berggren's Civ III (btw Wes is Tripping Daisy's guitar player)...i will also conjecture that Sid and Jeff knew this and this gave them a great deal of leeway in contract negociations...so the entire time table might come down to what Jeff Briggs decides

Some of the best software comes from companies that keep everything in-house, but only if they are in great finanical health. Blizzard did not always hold product until they were nearly perfect. Now with three great series under their belt they can do so. Firaxis on the other hand, is dependent on outside sources for their funding. Could it be that Sid Golf was necessary to keep Firaxis financially sound until the Civ3 pay-off? The Sim franchise is EA's and Firaxis has a long relationship with EA(SMAC and Sid's Cival War stuff). I think Civ3 is the first time Firaxis has developed a game for anyone but EA.

Blizzard has became financially sound by making great software not the other way around...if the balance sheet of a company determined the quality of it's games then i wish that Texaco, or BP, or Shell would start making games, because they have been doing pretty good since oil prices have been on the rise...alot of good games and great ideas have died because of funding problems at game developers (or when a publisher just decides to cancle an inhouse project like they did at Origin, with ultima sequal Origin...that seemed like a sure thing right?) I'm sure that Blizzard wasn't as well off finacially when they decided to hold off on starcraft as what they are now that they are holding off on warcraft3...but they still decided to push back it's release date by almost a year, and they produced quite possibly the best RTS game ever...Firaxis and Blizzard are both dependent on one thing and that is how many people buy their games...no matter what critics think, if WC3 doesn't sell, and neither does SC2, or D3 then blizzard will cease to exist...if civ3 sells 100 million copies (which it won't) then i am positive that firaxis will continue to stay in business

Could it be that Simgolf or any other EA title was required to fulfill firaxis's contract with EA...no matter what yin says about firaxis taking too much onto their plate i think basically to fulfill their contractual obligations to EA firaxis has to release a game for them and do it soon (also that contract was signed before firaxis had sold a single game, and i don't think they had as much leverage as they did with the civ3 contract) the reason that firaxis is making two games is that they have an obligation to EA to make another game for them and the chance at getting Civ3 was too good to pass up...if firaxis had of turned it down, maybe the developers who made CtP would have pitched a proposal at Infograms for civ3, so either Sid and company take Civ3 or somebody else gets it...

so firaxis took it...firaxis starts work on the abortive Dinosaurs project to fulfill their contract requirements to EA, it isn't working out...one day Sid and his good friend Will Wright are out on the golf course...they are talking about the pressures of their jobs, and Sid tells Will that the Dino's project is in trouble, that it isn't going to be up to Sid's standards and he is worried because EA is breathing down his neck...then him and Will come up with an idea that cashes in on both Sid and the Sim name at once, Sid Meier's Simgolf...it should be a fairly simple and straight forward game that should be easy to make, Will promises he will help Sid out in any way he needs, Sid like the idea, and decides he is going to bring a couple fresh ideas to both building games and golf games...Jeff Briggs and Jeff Morris who are considered to be the firaxis swat team (cuz they get results, plus Jeff can fire you if you aren't ready for crunch time )get assigned to Civ3 to make it work after Brian gets burnt out on making TBS games...Chris Pine gets a promotion and all of the best people (besides Sid who still plays Civ3 and tell the civ3 team if it's fun or not) get put on civ3...the less experianced people (not the worse people, just the ones who haven't already jelled into a high stress team yet) get put on Simgolf...firaxis suddenly is making two games, both of which could be hits

So don't compare Blizzard to Firaxis, nor should you expect Firaxis to act the way Blizzard does. They are two companies that are on the opposite ends of the software industry spectrum; ones that completely hold their fate in their hands, and those beholden to others.

i think it is more than fair to compare blizzard and firaxis...like the saying says, if you wanna be the best you gotta beat the best...i would say that blizzard is the best strategy game company out there and if firaxis wants that honor it's going to have to do the same thing...do i care if Sid makes 100,000 (or more) this year? no i dont i know Sid (and his family) cares but i don't...do i care if civ3 is best civ experaince ever...hell yes i care about that! i am a consumer and i want to consume the best products out there...however firaxis can laugh at me when they release a game that was rushed and unpolished because i will still (most likely) buy the game...however they won't be laughing when civ3 sells only (which is a relative term) 150k copies, especially when they were expecting 750k copies, because the game was rushed and people like me tell everyone to hold off and pick the game up if they find it in the bargin bin...firaxis and infograms make dramatically more money when they sell a game at 49.99 than when they sell the same game marked down to 19.99 (because they weren't moving)

as for the company that holds it's fate in their own hands, it is Firaxis...Jeff Briggs can do whatever he wants to, it is his company and he can run it how he sees fit...Rob Pardo, Max Schaefer and the rest of the crew at blizzard have to do what Havas Interactive, Inc. want them to...

so simply put...i think firaxis has full responsibility on the quality of Civ3...if Jeff Briggs decides to hold it back a month or so...it is his call...if Civ3 is rushed and shoddy then we can blame firaxis, and any thing they say will just be another lame excuse...if civ3 is a highly polished gem then we can thank firaxis, and nobody else can take credit for their accomplishment...that's what it comes down to...and i am counting on firaxis to make civ3 great

[yin26]

Blizzard has became financially sound by making great software not the other way around.

BRAVO! **wipes tears** Korn, you just saved me two months of posting on this topic. Do I have your permission to just hyper-link to that Manifesto as needed? Also, I hadn't considered that Sim Golf is a matter of meeting contractual agreements...hmmm.

[Rommel393]

the reason firaxis cant do it is because they cherish the casual gamer who will pick their game out of curiousity but toss their die hard civ players aside like so much cheap trash.

[korn469]

yin

i'm glad i saved you two months worth of posting...now maybe you can spend your time countering Rah's enthusiasm

hyperlink away...anyways once posted an idea becomes public domain anyways

and as for Simgolf i don't have any insider info, but i do remember reading somewhere that EA and firaxis signed a multigame deal, i know for a fact that infograms owns civ3, and that firaxis and infograms are the ones doing civ3...i also know for a fact that EA owns maxis and maxis owns (in this particular case) the Sim title, also sid was one of the special skins you could download from The Sims website, and that Will Wright and Sid have both been in the game business a long time and are probably friends...so putting things together that led me to the conclusion that firaxis to fulfill it's end of the contract with EA has to publish a title with EA fairly soon, the last title was Alien Crossfire, and it has been out a while (since either late 1999 or early 2k) so even if Simgolf comes out this year it will still have been over a year since firaxis has had a game distributed by EA...also the dino's game was going to be distributed by EA, because the firaxis-infogram deal is for civ3 only (if i have my facts straight) so it all makes sence...well at least in my way of thinking

Rommel393

i wouldn't say that firaxis tossed us aside like so much cheap trash...i do think that they have disreguarded most of the suggestions that we have sent to them, but i do think that they have listened to many of our suggestions...

but i think that games targeted toward the so called "causual gamer" need even more polish that games targeted toward the "hardcore gamer"

if eXcellent sofTware Corporation releases a game for a causual gamer on a console basically it CAN'T have any major bugs...it has to be highly polished...i know that nintendo and the other console makers have really stringent rules on QA...if they port that game from the console to the pc (which doesn't happen very much) and it now has bugs in it, the casual gamer isn't going to have the time or the patience to fool with it...downloading and unzipping a patch in the right place might be too much time and effort...

one of us hardcore gamers, will if need be go as far as downloading a patch...getting another program, hell maybe even editing the registry or irq settings, just to make the thing work...and even if it has bugs in it, but the game is great, we will play it...

so if u target a game right at the causual market...they are not going to take an entire night out just to download a 150mb patch...then to rewrite the rules.txt then to edit the registry and maybe put their network card on a different port to get the thing to work...they are either going to return it or never play it again...nobody complains when a game is finely tuned and with lots of polish

firaxis take the time to make civ3 the best civ experiance ever

[tniem]

Korn,

I posted the same thought about Dinos, in that the game was to fufil contract obligations.

I believe that Firaxis agreed to three games with EA. Which would be Gettysburg and SMAC. The third game being dinos/Sim Golf. Of course that would mean SMACX would not count as a game, only an add-on.

[Urban Ranger]

Amusing thread.

Somehow you people think that Firaxis is going to push Civ 3 out the door with tons of bugs in it? Why's that? Where's the evidence, or at least hints?


korn,

What great Blizzard software are you talking about? *scratchs head* Sorry, never heard of any.

[yin26]

Why's that? Where's the evidence, or at least hints?

1. Potential October release.
2. Assuming #1, the virtual lack of info so close to release.
3. Experience.

If Civ3 gets released in Q2 2002, though, all that pretty much goes away.

[MarkG]

the fact the firaxians have stated several times that there are no release dates and that a date should be ignored if it didnt came from them says nothing to yin of course....

[yin26]

It would mean something except that they have a publisher seemingly pushing a release date of October. While I have faith that Sid's name alone could push back the date, my worry isn't Firaxis on its own but the temptation to actually try to meet an insane deadline from a publisher thinking patches can cure everything.

[Warm Beer]

At the risk of sounding like a spammer, I must say, "Korn, that was the longest post I have ever read." (except, perhaps, if you count Yin's and Rah's 'reviews' of Civ3 and Father Beast's Parody in the same thread , but I digress...)

Not only was it long, it was quite informative, insightful and very succinct. Usually large posts put me to sleep (I know I ain't the only one)... but that was great, man. I should have commented on it earlier.

And regarding the 'rumored' October release date... A full page add in a gaming magazine looks quite official to me... either that, or it is irresponsible. At this point, neither one looks good.

[MarkG]

one one hand you have a publisher who MIGHT want to push for a certain date

on the other hand you have developer who you KNOW he wil push back the release if it is needed(the smac example)


and you choose the pessimistic and unbased possiblity....