c194# CIVILIZATION III, A SHOE TOO BIG?

[MarkG]

194# CIVILIZATION III, A SHOE TOO BIG?
The realistic faction speaks

by Shadowstrike

[Father Beast]

hey shadowstrike, I was wondering where you went.

I have to agree. a civ3 that has everything that was in THE LIST, and has an editor that can turn civ into pac-man would be unreasonably huge.

A lot of the griping that went on is being personally peeved that our personal favorite suggestions didn't become part of the game.

I do have to disagree about mp, though. these days, everything (except adventures) is expected to have MP ability. especially strategy games. I don't know how it is that most of the reviewers have glossed over the lack. If this was a new game in the genre, it would be expected in this day and age. or considered inferior.

Love to have you back. I became king at some point , and I didn't even notice for a couple of days.

[Shadowstrike]

I'm still here. *waves* Only occasionally these days though. Yeah, and you can see from the article how much my ego depends on these boards.

I guess my main incentive for writing that was to stop the hordes shouting "The game is missing feature xyz, I'll boycott it!". Ranting was flying everywhere, and I'll admit it, I was in the fray shouting alongside the masses. Then thee was the calm before Civ3.

You have a good point about multiplayer. I haven't really been watching the game market carefully these few years (and my tendancy to reach back to my SP roots), and I never thought that multiplayer support would become a critical component.

OTOH, Civ has always been a hard game to MP, considering the sheer number of turns, forcing it into a demi-RT game, which doesn't work either. Firaxis doesn't have anything cut out for it there, they must find the right balence between RT Civ, and mind-numbing turn based play that rarely gets past 2000 BC. Only the future will tell how it turns out.

I would still like a macro language though.

[yin26]

Well, a few comments:

Let's assume for a second that Civilization III is a totally new product on the market. Chances are, it would sell a little less, but it would receive far more positive reviews then negative. Instead of shouting: "What??? NO multiplayer?", we would be saying: "This game will have one of the best diplomacy models ever!"

I understand your point, but I think I'm not comparing Civ3 to what came before in the series. If this were Civ1, I'd *still* have the same complaints ... perhaps even louder. And in the meantime, really great OTHER games have come out showing that x, y and z CAN be done in a game.

We must realize that our dream Civilization III can never materialize because it would end up too impractical to be plausible.

I don't think an 'air superiority' function that actually works is impractical. Same with a myriad other issues that have NOTHING to do with some idealistic dream of what Civ3 could be.

Quality Product is the most important step ... and in some important ways, Firaxis stumbled.

[The Mad Monk]

I have to agree with Yin, but I'm not overly concerned. I'm not getting it at least until Christmas, so there's plenty of time for that all-important first patch...

[Compugasm 2]

Actually, i am more forgiving if a game needs patches. To find out what needs to be patched takes alot of time. As a programmer, i know nothing works perfectly the first time.

What i hate most are the missing little niceties that shouldn't be ommited, and will not be patched. Examples, typing "P" in a listbox jumping down to the letter "P". How about a way to find the best bases for min/food/com production. The ability to zoom out 1 or 2 levels for just an overview. Also i find myself Cris-Crssing the screen to select options which, is a waste of time. A better right-click menu would help. Reveal map options? Not in CivIII. Its all the little things like this that keep good games, from being great.

SMACs graphics weren't the greatest and i honestly hate the drab colors. But the interface was thought out a little better. Players had more customization control. Over the long haul, do you play a game for years after its publish date because of the graphics, or the playability? CivIII took a hit on playability. That's why people are dissapointed.

[Hawksguard]

Actually, i am more forgiving if a game needs patches. To find out what needs to be patched takes alot of time. As a programmer, i know nothing works perfectly the first time.

While a good part of me is wont to agree with you on this, there is still a small part of me that has to absolutely bring exception to this. It's the small part of me that has to say "Why shouldn't something I pay $40 or $50 or $60 work in a manner that I would deem comprehensive and complete?" Honestly, I don't think that Civ3, in its current incarnation, is either of those. However, this is not to say that I don't currently thoroughly enjoy Civ3, or that I won't enjoy it even more once patches start flowing in the public's direction. But I don't think it's a good idea to allow ourselves, as consumers, to let ourselves think that way...to lower our standards or expectations of products.

Sorry if this sounds like a rant. Honestly, the part of me that feels this way is really very small, but it tends to get larger and more vocal, especially when something "near and dear" to me is on the line. Basically, I don't want to see Firaxis go the way of other to-remain-nameless megasoftware corporations (rumored to be based in Seattle), who despite accusations of having a CEO who is the anti-Christ, merely suffer from a severe lack of caring about the consumer any farther than getting their hands on the $199 it costs to buy their most recent product version ($99 to upgrade).

Lately I have found that the software I purchase (games, or otherwise) is a direct reflection of how I perceive the game designers/producers in relation to their fan base. I've always seen Firaxas (and my other favorite development company, Bioware) as having a sincere interest in the community. This is something I feel drive goods gaming companies and as a result, produces excellent games.

As far as Civ3 being a "SHOE TOO BIG", well, I'd have to say that it was a pretty big shoe too fill and no, it simply wasn't going to happen, at least not the way most people expected. I remember reading "THE LIST" many moons ago, chuckling, most of the time thinking "wow, if they actually make this game it will come out in like, 2020." However, I think the developers have done a good job at taking THE LIST and some of the better ideas and incorporating it into their vision of the game. From reading these boards, I think a lot of people have the misunderstanding that the game was to be compeltely designed around the needs and wants of THE LIST. I think these are the people who are going to be the most confused and disappointed when they have discovered this is not the truth.

Even in its current, flawed state, I think the game excels in most areas. I think it represents a concentrated effort in raising the bar against Civ2 or AC, and achievs a good balance between the fundmantal "civness" of games past and in the ingenuity in bringing in useful, new features. I think the only people who will be or should be disappointed (aside from the aforementioned) are those expecting absolute perfection....the kind that say "we've waited X years for this game to come out, why doesn't this work this way...why didn't they do this...why didn't they do that" or those nitpicking the "bugginess" of the game. Unlike other companies, Firaxis has a record of actually fixing problems with patches, so all that remains to be seen is what Firaxis deems a "bug" and what it deems "normal, albeit different, gameplay than what has come before."

Ramblingly yours,
Dave

[Steve Clark]

Originally posted by yin26
Well, a few comments:

I understand your point, but I think I'm not comparing Civ3 to what came before in the series. If this were Civ1, I'd *still* have the same complaints ... perhaps even louder. And in the meantime, really great OTHER games have come out showing that x, y and z CAN be done in a game.

I hope you are not refering to EU, yin???

Come to think of it, I think the way I got into Civ2 offers a leason for Civ3, at least for me. You see, I didn't play my first civ game until I bought Civ2 MGE in January 1999. By that time, the 1.3 patch had been released, along with MP (obviously) and there were hundreds of great scenarios to play. It probably was a good thing that I wasn't around when Civ2 was first released, like I am with Civ3. I wish I could have gotten into Civ3 the same way as I did Civ2. Sigh.

[Grumbold]

I'm a little surpise that an article speaking aspirationally about what Civ 3 might contain has been published over a week after factual info about what was really in Civ 3 began to hit the boards. Any one of the more reasoned reviews of the game would seem more appropriate.

Firaxis have done well to produce a game that we have all been eagerly awaiting. It wasn't canned or cut to pieces unlike some other highly anticipated titles in recent years. Its playable and stable on most platforms but some bugs that would be hard pressed to go unnoticed had any solid beta testing been done have slipped through. Pretty much a standard game release then.

I don't think either camp can claim "victory". The bugs and missing features are undeniable but not enough to stop the game being playable and enjoyable for the majority. We should not allow Infogrames or Firaxis to think that this level of quality is perfectly acceptable though. Only by voicing our complaints might we persuade the suits to take a different attitude to quality next time.

[Jen Dragon]

I am expressing my oppinion of games released that need patches or missing multiplayer by not buying it until after the first couple of patches, or if necessary waiting for the bargin bin. I finally got the hang of waiting past the initial release, reading boards, not reviews, to form an opinion before I buy. I can wait, I own 300 computer games, theoretically I should be able to wait, I wonder why its so hard to wait, but I will wait. But it is the only statement that Infograms and Firaxis and other companies will understand, I am tired of beta testing their games for free, or I should say at my expense, period end of discussion. If I negativly effect their sales numbers by waiting for a patch then I'm doing my part as a game consumer critic. But someone has to buy it to tell the rest of us it needs a patch, catch 22. Thanks all on this board for your honest discussions about the game so I can make an informed purchase, or non purchase.

[Jen Dragon]

P.S. I bought CivII 3 times... CivII ...CivIIMPG..... ToT...+ one of the 2 scenario packs befor ToT..... I will not ...will not .....repeat that process.... even though I can afford it now.

[Compugasm 2]

I should clarify what i said earlier. What i meant about forgiving bugs is related only to game balance. But if developers gave the community more control over game variables they wouldn't need to bother, we could fix it. It would be great if that could be done with a full featured editor. If that isn't possible, then notepad will do just fine.

[Compugasm 2]

In RailRoad Tycoon 2 they gave you so much control you could program in VB like code anything you wanted. However, they didn't tell you how to do it. I assume because it would be impractical to supply a 400 page manual. But there were other easier things you could do. Lots of Y/N checkboxes for units, you could look at what script was there for a particular senario and change the values or add a few new ones.

[Hawksguard]

I should clarify what i said earlier. What i meant about forgiving bugs is related only to game balance. But if developers gave the community more control over game variables they wouldn't need to bother, we could fix it. It would be great if that could be done with a full featured editor. If that isn't possible, then notepad will do just fine.

I'll agree with that 100% (sorry if I sounded a little overzealous in my response).

I would find it very interesting to know why Firaxis decided to scrap the tried-and-true, "I-can-edit-the-game-files-with-notepad" route in favor of the new file extensions. I assume they were trying to make the editing tools more powerful and dynamic...unfortunately, most of us have already seen the state the editing tools are currently in. Since there's a good chance that problem will be remedied (soon), most people I think are willing to let it slide, for now. Of course, that hasn't stopped a lot of people from already diving right into mod and scenario creation. *I* would probably be doing that too, except the game is too fun and time consuming to be working on anything else.

Busily yours,
Dave

[Jayis Solis]

If the game was everything the veterans wanted, then it would not be accessible to the new people learning it. Those fans truly devoted to the phenomenon created by Sid Meier would want others to be able to enjoy this game.

For that to occur, I'm sure trade-off had to be made.