I want my money back!

[Libertarian]

Which comments do you see as valid?

[n.c.]

Apparently there are a number of Civ III designers, like Libertarian, on these boards. Why else would people personally attack/insult the thread starter? I'd hate to think they were petty, childish buttheads.

[Deathray]

Originally posted by Venger


Says you. Let us know where we can forward all comments so you can approve them for publication...

Venger

The reason that a lot of the comments aren't valid is that a lot of them have no logical basis whatsoever. Most of them are the equivalent of screaming "I want it! I want it! I want it!" in an attempt to knock the price down while bartering. In fact, by the looks of things, that is why the thread starter's trade efforts are going amiss ;-)

[Libertarian]

Originally posted by n.c.
Apparently there are a number of Civ III designers, like Libertarian, on these boards. Why else would people personally attack/insult the thread starter? I'd hate to think they were petty, childish buttheads.

As a fellow North Carolinian, I can't imagine what you perceived to be a personal attack. That he can't play the game? But that's obvious. His ignorance of ZOCs, for example. I didn't design Civ3, but if I had, I would likely appreciate someone learning how to play before offering me any criticisms of it. Wouldn't you?

I know there's been a lot of tension here between the supporters and the critics. Frankly, I'd like to see a middle ground, where criticism is offered by those who state their case with the respect and civility that the Firaxis team deserves. They are people who labored long hours through the night to bring us this game. I see no point in flaming either them or their work. Especially since they had nothing whatsoever to do with decisions regarding the release schedule or any other such particulars.

Sycophantism is not called for, but then neither are mean spirited snipes that serve solely the mundane purpose of venting the critic's hysterical emotion.

[Bakunine]

Originally posted by n.c.
Apparently there are a number of Civ III designers, like Libertarian, on these boards.

Are you really a CIV III designer Libertarian?

In case you are:

for the game.

for the lack of beta testing.

And for every patch that comes out!

[n.c.]

Originally posted by Libertarian
Sycophantism is not called for, but then neither are mean spirited snipes that serve solely the mundane purpose of venting the critic's hysterical emotion.

"General" forums are exactly where people vent emotions. Yelling at your dog about a computer game is not terribly satisfying (or nice).

There is also clearly a difference between comments directed at an absent company and an individual. If some said Dan Magaha was a jerk/bonehead/whatever I'd come down on them as well.

A middle ground would be preferable. Sadly we lost much of it when the sycophants responded so harshly to posters' understandable (if occasionally incorrect) frustrations.

[Bakunine]

Originally posted by Libertarian


I didn't design Civ3...

Ops... It seems i took too long in the thread before replying.

My dinner's fault!!!

[Lord Cannager]

???

r u just looking for something 2 complain about. half of the things u named meke it R_E_A_L_I_S_T_I_C_(DUH). like the strategic resources so called problemis really what it was like. do u think north america had horses....um...let me think....NO.they T_R_A_D_E_D_.WHY CANT U GET PAST 1000 A.D. TIME STILL GOES ON EVEN IF U R NOT DOING WELL.r u a QUITTER!aaww u must feel so bad, QUITTER!. no im just kidding. (like my teeth?)
no such thingt as a perfect game right?

///\\\\
-___-

________________________________________
"Friends, Romans, Countrymen lend me your ears"

[Kenjura]

Re: I want my money back!

Originally posted by Lou Wigman

* The workers are a micro-management nightmare! (CTP has Public Works which HUGELY reduces this problem)

Perhaps you haven't heard of the "automate" feature. As long as your workers have a land route to what work needs to be done, they'll do it. Place them in the neighborhood and they unfailingly get the job done. I've had basically no problems with automated workers.

* There is no group movement (CTP has group movement)

That would be nice, but this is civ3, not ctp. CTP had the name of civilization by a legal settlement, not by any pure ancestry.

* The combat system(?) is a farce. (CTP has a good one)

It may interest you to know that the combat system is an evolved form of the civ2 system. Why do this? Well, perhaps it was because civ2 was one of the most revolutionarily excellent games ever made. That's why CTP exists.

* There is no terraforming.

There ain't much of that in real-life. When's the last time you heard of a 20-mile-square section of mountain turned into hills? I don't think the human race is capable of that.

* Have I mentioned that the workers are a micro-management nightmare?

Have I mentioned AUTOMATING? All you have to do is press "a".

* There are no quick alternative governments in the early parts of the game.

In any appreciable difficulty, you will not be making enough money to support even a small army outside of despotism. And really, how many forms of government were there in 4000 BC?

* It is not possible to raise an army and put this on 'stand-by' at a reduced cost until needed.

Like most of what you say, this sounds like "civ3 isn't CTP".

* Roads are needed EVERYWHERE to achieve maximum gain. This produces a genuine blot on the landscape and has strategic military implications as well.

Without roads, there is no commerce. It is implied that there are little villages, suburbs, and settlements all over your empire, especially around the cities. The roads provide much-needed access for those people. Also, the enemy cannot use roads in your territory.

* Units have no zone of control. What is the point of occupying key choke points if the enemy can just walk right past! So much for fortresses!!

Some units DO have a zone of control. They get a free shot at a passing enemy. With a large amount of fortified units, you will dominate anyone trying to bypass them. Also, one square is a very large space. You can't hope to control as much as a major metropolis with just one unit. A "choke point" is one you can fill with three or four units. If you want one unit to block eight squares for you, maybe you should modify the rules and play chieftain.

* There is no trade system. Being able to exchange luxuries is no substitute.

The trade system is sufficient. What, you want to be able trade specific things? Like what? Units? You think people switch loyalty that easily? What do you want to trade beside resources, luxuries, gold, technology, cities, diplomatic agreements, and communications? I think, for the civ series' first trade system, it's EXCELLENT. Civ is not CTP, and CTP ain't never been civ.

* The diplomacy system is ridiculous. Do the designers really think that we want to exchange 'things' in these obviously lopsided trades? Forget it!!!

That's a little vague. Just what are you talking about?

* The strategic resources don't work. I never seem to have the goods I need and usually I can't find a trading partner.

There's a lot of luck in strategic trading. Yes, it WAS intended that you may have to wait many turns, build many roads and harbors, and even give away techs if you want certain strategic resources. Yes, you aren't simply supposed to control everything you need.

If you want better resource placement, play a pre-made map, like the world map. Random maps seem more prone to poor resource placement.

* The AI behaves infuriatingly stupidly. It finds a one square spot (usually jungle or desert) right in the middle of your empire where your cultural boundary does not quite extend and puts a city there. AAARGH!!!! Noooooooooooo!!!! Worse still if you do manage to capture it then ....

They've got to try, don't they? You're telling me you don't ever do that to them? If you want an easier game, play chieftain.

* It is not possible to disband an unwanted city.

For once, I agree. This infuriates me. But then, how are you supposed to disband a city. What, does washington say to los angeles "we don't want you. go away". That's impossible. But maybe turning a city into settlers would be really nice.

* Did someone mention ICS? The AI plops cities everywhere like fly droppings. The only viable strategy is to try and match the AI in this respect but I can never seem to keep up.

That's funny. Most of us can. Maybe you aren't fit for anything above chieftain.

The flaws in the game far outweigh its good features. It is massively inferior to CTP in terms of game features. if only CTP had a better AI! I guess my civ days are over.

You're part of a minority that prefers CTP to civ. CTP was never civ. They wanted sid meier's legacy, but to my understanding, the team who made it was either only slightly the same members or didn't contain a single civ-creator at all. It was a business thing.

All you're saying is "civ3 isn't CTP". Why make ctp again? Why the HELL would sid meier COPY a game that only exists because he made a better one?! CTP already exists. Go play it if you want.

[Libertarian]

Originally posted by n.c.
"General" forums are exactly where people vent emotions. Yelling at your dog about a computer game is not terribly satisfying (or nice).

There is also clearly a difference between comments directed at an absent company and an individual. If some said Dan Magaha was a jerk/bonehead/whatever I'd come down on them as well.

A middle ground would be preferable. Sadly we lost much of it when the sycophants responded so harshly to posters' understandable (if occasionally incorrect) frustrations.

Three good points made and noted.

Your good temperament makes it possible for you and I to find common ground. I'll dispense immediately with both pejorative terms, "whiner" and "sycophant" (and equivalents).

As I see it, the critics were the first to emerge. Not sure why. Likely, the supporters, like me, were still playing. I quite imagine that early reactions might have had something to do with whatever fortune (or lack of it) we were finding in our games.

By the time we got back, there was a whole slew of critical threads. Many were duplicates. I understand the venting. But I hope you can understand that the rest of us saw it as overreacting, particularly given that it was both ubiquitous and contemptuous.

"Damn you, Firaxis" does not, in my view, constitute the amelioration of a personal attack. That clearly means Dan, Soren, et al. We supporters were, frankly, mortified at the sheer intensity of the complaints. I think what we did was probably overreact the other way, attacking the critics, much as we would a series of brush fires.

It has calmed down quite a bit. But as new people arrive, who are reading neither the previous threads nor their own manuals, it is difficult to tolerate more piling on.

As I say, your points are well taken. All of them. Can we meet halfway by asking the new critics to vent in threads that are already doing that. That way, we can see more give and take here, and maybe even more common ground, between the critics and the supporters.

[n.c.]

Lib- Ditto to everything. Now if we can just make everyone as reasonable as we are.

[Raleigh]

quote:

"There is no terraforming."


"There ain't much of that in real-life. When's the last time you heard of a 20-mile-square section of mountain turned into hills? I don't think the human race is capable of that. "



Well I don't know about that but they did cut a continent in half to make a canal

Also, criticisms, even duplicated are necessary to provide designers with feedback for patches or Civ 4. Positive reinforcement also helps. Obviously, some features will be hotly debated. I prefered the old ZOCs myself, for instance. Civility is definitely desirable though.

If you guys want to see real flames though you should have checked out the old Anarcy Online boards. They were so bad the designers feared bad press b4 their European release and shut it down, fascists that they were (and I was on moderate on those boards until they shut them!).

[Libertarian]

NC,

Maybe it's like Cheerwine. You know, a Carolina "thang".

Stepping out on a limb here, I would say that my biggest criticism at the moment is the circumstance itself, i.e., the uncertainty in which we all find ourselves. What exactly is being worked on? We got a couple of Mark Burnette type hints in the Soren chat, but beyond that, we really don't know what, if anything, is being done about any particular aspect.

Certain bugs are, in fact, debilitating. What can you possibly do about air superiority? In the Strategy forum, I asked what people were doing about that bug when they reach late game. The answers are all along the lines of "lose".

It might have been prudent to have released a fix of such bugs that actually destroy the game. Then again, it might not. [...shrug...] I'm not sure even to whom I should address the issue. Is the patch being scheduled by Firaxis or Infogrames?

Anyway, I just wanted you to know that I don't think things are ideal by any means.

[teturkhan]

Bad Buy!

how can all you people talk this game up? I am a huge Civ fan, but honestly Civ III does not live up to its predecessors. I am disappointed in the game and wish I hadn't bought it. Hopefully patches will be released to address the multitude of problems - until that time this game will sit on my shelf.

[Ludwig]

Just about the only thing is this particular list of criticisms that I fully agree with is the original poster's statement about roads and railroads. The current system places a premium on roads as a terrain improvement per se and not as a communications/transportation system. "Uglying" up the map with roads and railroads on every square brings huge benefits. It's entirely an aesthetic judgment on my part, but maps with roads and railroads heading nowhere in every square are just inelegant and awkward-looking, IMHO. There HAS to be a better way to model the importance of roads; perhaps instead of a food or commerce bonus for every tile containing a road, you could get food and commerce bonuses based on the number of friendly cities on a road network. This would place a premium on linking all of your cities with roads and rails, so you'd still want to build them - but you'd want to build an actual transportation network, instead of the Road Blob.