Now, if YOU were the Firaxis PR person...

[Fidel]

hm, how authentic IS that email exchange?

[yin26]

Markos:

I've said this a million times, and I'll keep saying it: You have a great site and put a hell of a lot of work into it. End of story.

I'm just glad that we both agree that better PR from Firaxis 'probably' would lead to a lot more money being made, thereby allowing them to invest in even better games in the future.

Believe it or not, I would like to see that happen...

[MarkG]

Originally posted by yin26
I've said this a million times, and I'll keep saying it: You have a great site and put a hell of a lot of work into it. End of story.

i thank you but i never said i didnt believe you or anything like that

i just dont like any kind of implications regarding my creditability in the way i do things on this site...

[yin26]

Let's put it this way:

1) You own the site and need to give the developers every good chance to prove themselves.

2) I am just a lowly fan and feel the need to make sure that 'fan issues' are being taken seriously by the developer.

[MarkG]

no fan deserves to be characterizated "lowly" yin

[yin26]

Wow. Even Yin? This is a touching display of PR, Markos. Take note, Firaxis!

[jglidewell]

Originally posted by Pembleton
Firaxis doesn't have to worry about PR. It's going to sell loads based on at least the following factors:

1) Getting press in Time and NY Times. Even Starcraft and Diablo never got this.
2) Sid Meier's reputation. Why else do they keep putting his name on games?
3) Civ2 is considered the best game of all time by most reviewing sites or magazines. If not they put it in their top 5.
4) Civ2 was a bestseller as well as the original Civ. The projected audience is not just the serious gamers like us, but the "casual" gamers and people who don't even know what HTML means. I have a couple friends who have only played a handful of computer games, such as Myst. Their favorites are Civilization.

Look at CTP. The first one was a bestseller for a while because of its name. Civilization: Call To Power. It didn't matter that the game really sucked, it still continued to sell well even after people started returning it. When the Civ name was dropped after the lawsuit and it was just Call To Power 2, no-one bought it. Activision realized this and stopped supporting it after 1 patch.

And guess what the "masses" who play Civ play? SP.

My gosh I have Pembleton Dittobumps all over me!!!!!!
TT TT
Di o Di o.

[yin26]

Yes, but can the Sid cow be milked forever on name alone? It's not the 80's or mid 90's anymore. Juuuust a few more names in programming/game design have popped up since then. The day of locking one's self in a closet and zip-locking your 5.25 a few months later are over.

Not looking for every edge you can get in this market is the kiss of death.

[Leonidas]

When I read through the threads on this site I don't see shouting or hysteria. What I see is a group of dedicated fans that have put in a great deal of time and effort in their attempts to mold CivIII into a game they can both be proud of and enjoy for a long time to come.

While CivIII will still be a great game (I have no doubt on this point), the rush to deadline and the elimination of certain aspects of the game, means that it will not be what it potentially could have become. This I think, is the whole key to the debate.

There are things that we know will not be in the game. But what other shortcuts have been taken that we don't know about?

The debate about MP is the not issue. The issue really is the fact that shortcuts are being taken in this game. That is sad. I would have expected this from any other game except CivIII.

But alas poor Civ, I knew it well. Whether it be nobler in the heart to buy the Special Edition or wait for the reviews, that is the question. . .

[jglidewell]

Yin, I have a question?

If you can remember that far back,

The first time you had CIV I in your hands. Did you worry about MP? Did you worry about the Graphics? Did you worry about playability? Did you worry that it was not in developement long enough? Did you worry about anything?

[yin26]

jglidewell: Well, I was, relatively speaking, a kid (I'm 30 now). I was still amazed by any kind of decent graphics on a screen...even if they were criticized for their time as "looking like EGA graphics." I had never seen a game like it. Do you know some people never even knew that was a wagon blinking on the screen? I knew that much. From there, it was discovery...glorious discovery. I must have read the manual 20 times, just for fun if anything else.

I never saw a Civ 1 website. I never cared. It was a solitary experience, and everything I ever found out about Civ 1, I found out myself. It was a simple time. My expectations were low...but raised a huge step after Civ 1, to be sure.

But now, these many years later, I have played Civ 1 and 2 to death. I have played cutting edge games both in terms of graphics and execution. I have seen plenty of games like Civ since then, most not as good, but many quite similar.

I have seen a thousand websites, maybe more. Now, most times, the games I play are part of a community in one way or another. And that community affects my enjoyment of the game...positively or negatively. Things are more complicated now. My expectations are much higher...and for Civ 3 to even maintain the status quo would take a huge effort.

In terms of many of the things I have outlined, that effort so far, at least as far as Firaxis has shown us, has been less than stellar. "Pretty good," as Markos said? Yes. A leader in the field? A game that will match the magic of Civ 1 in modern terms? Clearly, I have concerns.

The Net has brought out the worst and absolute best in gaming. Firaxis, however, still seems to think the Net is a relatively minor concern.

[mactbone]

The Net has brought out the worst and absolute best in gaming. Firaxis, however, still seems to think the Net is a relatively minor concern.

It IS a minor concern, at least if you think interms of compare and contrast. The average gamer I'm willing to bet will hardly ever go to a developer's website let alone a fansite. The best place to get the word out about your game is still print. A casual gamer or even a non-gamer may walk past a newstand and seeing a cover talk of "Civ, the latest and greatest" will start to think about the game. They may even pick up the magazine and flip around to look at pictures. Boom, Firaxis just added another potential customer. Plus, there are sites like Gamespot and Gamespy which look for the information we find here (they probably get most of their info from the Developer's site though). What I'm trying to say is that if it's not posted on their website, in a magazine (although there can be inaccuracies here as well), or Official Posts, I don't think Firaxis is sending a message to a broad audience. Therefore they can see the net as a small part of an ad campaign. With a name like Civ3 they could just ship it to stores w/o advertising and it would sell well.

[belinda9]

ok I'm just your average, lowly consumer.
I'm not a teenager anymore, and my discretionary income has alot more demands upon it. I'm also not what one would consider a hardcore gamer -- yeah, I got a few games I play, but I don't run out and spend 50 or 60 dollars a month buying new PC games.
Having said that, I will add that I buy related information (like PC Gaming, etc.) because I DO research what I buy instead of just going out and plunking down my hard-earned bucks to try something out.
So, I think it was a valid point made that Firaxis could well have addressed ALL the questions people might have had about their game while they were shilling it all over GenCon and E3 -- and nowhere in the press releases stemming from these efforts did I see any mention of MP capability present OR future. I don't think it's too much to ask not to have to "buy a pig in a poke" (to use an old expression). If they have valid reasons for developing a game and releasing it without MP capability, why can they not just say so up front? Personally, I don't think MP is something that works best as just "tacked onto" what is essentially setup from the original design point of view as a SP game; thus, if it's going to be a SP game that they might tack a MP patch on at some future date, might I not expect to know that at least before I have the opportunity to send them money to preorder the game? (which I could do even now,BTW)
These people should know their market -- yes, there are those who could care less about MP. But do they not have market research that shows a MP market? Is it not in their best interest to find out who likes what about existing games and address these markets?
So I come away with the bad taste in my mouth that, as a person who would rather spend my money and computer resources on a game designed as a multiplayer game, I am not important to them and they think I'll blindly run out and preorder a game based on the rosy projections of "great graphics". pfft.
No thanks.
As far as "riding on Sid Meier's name" goes; again, this is 2001. People under the age of 30 (which is, after all, probably their projected demographic) don't necessarily even know who Sid Meier is. Case in point -- the new SimGolf game Sid is involved in. As part of the promotion for this game, EA/Maxis posted a sim download of Sid Meier on their Sims webpage -- and the overwhelming response to that in _their_ forums was "Who is Sid Meier?"
ok, granted, that's sim-people and not civ-people, but you get my drift.
I just don't think I should _have_ to be able to cruise various forums to pick up bits and pieces of information and-or rumor about a game when they SHOULD just tell us what it is we're going to be able to buy from them. Is that so much to ask?
oh, and at least I'm glad I did finally get over to their website (www.civ3.com) to find out what I could as I notice by the system requirements that unless I want to fork over a grand or so to buy a new computer that I'm not going to be able to play their game in any case -- even if I couldn't find out _anything_ at that site about my original question.
One last bit of info. They DO have over at www.civ3.com, posted right on the front page, a link to askthecivteam questions about the game -- and promising to address selected questions in future updates of the site. So at least that's something. Guess I'll just have to keep an eye on that to see what, if, anything they have to say.

[jglidewell]

Originally posted by yin26
From there, it was discovery...glorious discovery. I must have read the manual 20 times, just for fun if anything else.

This is the highest expectation I have for civ iii. It might be unfair but it is what i would want every game 'sold' to deliver. IMO I have never seen a sequel as good as the original though. I didn't buy Civ ii for some years, it just seemed like the original to me. No 'discovery' just improvements which in hindsight could of been critizised for not being in civ i.

The discovery for me thus far for civ iii is the addition of culture, Will it really be part of the game? Will there be anything to explore there?

I too, feel things are being pushed from somewhere. Things such as 16 civs vs 8 civs are somewhat mystifying and gives suspicion that it is being rushed.

[Leonidas]

The internet a rare concern? Maybe.

But consider this: there are over 11,000 registered users for this forum alone. Add another 5 to 10,000 lurkers. They are able to see what this community says about a game. Bingo.

Whether the review is good or bad, word spreads like wildfire. Each of those persons above (approximately 20,000) each know at least 3 to 4 other people or more. Add other forums, more people, etc and you can see the impact the net can make.

For example, look at the release of CTP2. This forum castigated it. The result? Only about 30 to 40,000 copies were sold.

While the average gamer may be sucked into buying any game that is released on store shelves - eventually, even THEY will learn to READ reviews before buying another game.

If you hit the dumbest animal on the head long enough, eventually, even it learns to step out of the way. . .

What was it that Lincoln said? "You can fool some of the people some of the time. You can even fool some of the people all of the time. But you will never fool all of the people all of the time."

Game companies need to take this lesson to heart. . .