v1.16f: Issues? Bugs? This is the thread

[gillskill]

missing resource

someone else reported this with Iron. I discovered steam power and my trade advisor says I have 1 coal somewhere. I used ctrl-shft-m and could not find the coal supposedly in my borders anywhere! but I still have it in my city boxes and can build railroads and stuff.

The Indians attacked me with war-elephants and I lost a city with iron and so was unable to produce knights. My fault, I thought, and carried on producing chariots, to no great effect. Many years into the war I then discover I have another iron resource (not just discovered). It was connected up but not showing in the city info boxes. I had to pillage the square and relay my roads and hey presto.

[Peets]

I put some settlers on ctrl+n then they will connect cities and resoruces

[cheerful]

Relocating palace is too expensive

I have about 20 cities on a standard map. In the middle age, my best builder produces 20+ shields per turn. It takes about 20 turns to build a great wonder in that city. But it takes about 100 turns to build palace. I can understand the attempt to make it difficult to do "palace bouncing". But making it so expensive is ridiculous. My palace is determined by the random start, not where I wanted, at the begining of the game. And I don't want empire that is too small -- difficult to beat AI's advantage.

I would say making it as expensive as the wonder in that age is a good measurement. 5 times that is NOT, making relocating impossible without leader.

[Dr. K.]

Firaxis owes the paying customers, not the other way 'round

I am going to be judgemental of Firaxis here, so be warned.

I would like to add my voice to that of PN from the UK who has been posting in this thread.

I am a veteran of Civ I and Civ II ( but not the CTP series or SMAC).
I have not bought CivIII, mostly because I am a Mac user and it's not out yet. I decided to read this thread, because I was wondering what progress was being made fixing the program so it could be ported to the Mac. I consider myself lucky not to have plunked down the cash for this incredibly half-baked product.

From the amount of by-play generated at scores of fansites, it is quite clear that CivIII is fraught with bugs of all genus and species. These bugs range from major (install bugs, scrolling problems, hangs and crashes at all stages) to minor (all manner of animation, sound, typos, color/font, features not working as advertised) to serious design/balance flaws (AI trade cheating, persistent rampant corruption, warriors trashing modern armor, palaces costing 17 bazillion shields, and all other manner of illogical inconsistencies). Taken together, these bugs must make the game unplayable, and it should never have been released in this stage of development.

At first, I thought Firaxis was being accomodating to listen to its customers and field bug reports. Then I realized, at about the same time as PN, that the community of their paying customers is essentially being used to do the beta-testing that Firaxis should be paying its employees/contract workers to do. Don't these employees include play-testers as well as programmers? Given the plethora of possible hardware/system combinations, I imagine they'd have to hire quite a few. But why bother with this overhead cost, when they can simply take customers' money and then have them do the testing if they want a decent product?!

Well, they were right to pursue this strategy, since people are apparently going for it. My suggestion is to vote with your feet. Perhaps when Firaxis is faced with a high percentage of product returns to the store with a demand for money back, they will properly deal with the problems. It's that simple. If most people don't like when pikemen defeat their modern armor 40% of the time or when a city 10 squares away has 50% production loss then they won't buy it or they'll return it. Then we'll see who considers these properties "features" and who considers them "bugs". The developers will follow the money.

So, you say, "Have you any idea how massive and complicated the code is?!" Well, that's not the paying customers' problem. If it's not economical to produce a decent product, the market will ultimately demonstrate (through product returns) that it is less economical to produce a lousy one.

Firaxis owes me nothing, so I am not angry, but it does owe it's paying customers.

I hope I haven't offended anyone, but it is ineluctable that someone will take offense.

To quote one of my favorite leaders:
"I don't give 'em hell, I give 'em the truth; they think it's hell."
--Harry S. Truman

[Raion]

While there may be game-playing bugs left, there is still no excuse for Microsoft's OS's.
Let me put it this way. I have Windows 98SE on my computer. I tried and tried to re-install CIVIII to get the sound to work. Infogames in their support wisdom, said get video and sound drivers. My drivers are fine. What is not fine?
When you update anything from Microsoft, I guess, like IE5 or IE4 to like IE5.5, Microsoft decides not to say that it just might be sticking on parts of Windows 2000 or something.

What did this do to the CivIII game? I am glad you asked!
The bink32.dll file that I was suppose to use did not work with the sound, the opening movie always locked up the computer until I renamed the 'sound.dll' file so sound would not be there with the opening movie.
For over a month, I went on this way, contacting Infogames support, and playing without sound.

What did I do?

I used the bink32.dll file for Windows 2000 that came on the CD, and adjusted the acceleration of my graphic card down, (because that is the way my ATI graphic card works with the game).
What happened?
Now I have sound and video in the opening movie and sound in the game. It was not my drivers for sound and video display, it was the fact that when upgrading or updating files to IE5.5, Microsoft is sticking files on my computer that actually were for Windows 2000.
The game works fine now, since I tried the other bink32.dll file included on the CD for Windows 2000.

Who knows what Microstuffit is doing at any time?

One thing I do know is that if I can find the 5-1/4 floppy of Sid Meier's Pirates -- I can kick my Apple IIc computer to get it to work, put in the disk if it is still good, and have a computer that will play Sid Meier's Pirates with an old joystick because it is not an IBM compatible computer with a whatever OS on it!

As for game-playing issues, now I can finally play this CIV III beast.
So it is harder, may take some time to balance it out.
I think I remember Sid having to teach the computer in CIV II to play like a human -- to build roads and railroads back then in a patch that came out later. It turned into a beautiful game with many scenarios.

How many games do you really have where you can say that?

Probably none!

[Agni]

Program aborts after F11

I am running Windows XP Professional with the latest updates from M$. Whenever I press F11 to see top cities, I get this problem:

I press F11 and see top cities
Press x to exit the screen
Now if I do anything, the program aborts

Also, I am looking forward to the coastal fortress firing automatically at the passing enemy ships fix. Currently they are of not much use

[vincentz]

Dr. K: Heeeeeeeeeelloooo. Play the game before you start whining about its bugs! You might think it is fine and dandy in reading the bug thread to see if you would like the game, but it is a bit like only reading Fhatwas to make up your mind about America (sorry for the extrme analogy).

Civ III is not bugfree, no game is, but is damn playable. You should not that just because one or two people encounter a problem (system stability etc.) does not mean that we all experience them and are suffering greatly under the wretched product we have bought with our hard owned money.

Buy the game and get a life.

[samsmithnz]

I agree with vincentz. What people like Dr K don't relize is that most of the people who post here have a problem, how many people out there are far too busy happily playing to come in here and post a problem????

Civ 3 is an awesome game, and for the small amount of issues I've come across, i'm very happy!

[Biggles266]

Small Setup Bug

Has anyone else noticed this?

If I start my PC and then run Civ3, on the next boot or restart I get the message:

__________________________________
Please wait while Setup updates your configuration files. This may take a few minutes...


Completed updating files, contiunuing to load Windows...
__________________________________

To test, turn on your PC. Do not run anything. Restart. Watch for message while booting. Run Civ3. Quit. Restart PC. Watch for message while booting. I can reproduce this without fail.

Now I know this isn't much of a big deal but it takes my system boot time (from the Starting Windows 98... bit) from 13 seconds up to about 14 or 15 seconds so I don't like it.

Win98SE
Civ3 1.16f

I don't know if this really helps for this problem but here are the specs anyway:
Processor and Speed Intel Pentium III ~550MHz
Total System Memory 384Mb
DirectX Version DirectX 8.1 (4.08.01.0881)

Video Card Name NVIDIA RIVA TNT2 Model 64/Model 64 Pro
Manufacturer NVIDIA
Approx. Total Memory 31.5Mb

Sound Card Name Creative SBPCI Direct Sound Driver
Manufacturer Creative

Video Driver: 4.13.01.2183
Sound Driver: 4.12.01.2011

[Dr. K.]

Foot somewhat in mouth

Originally posted by samsmithnz
...What people like Dr K don't relize is that most of the people who post here have a problem, how many people out there are far too busy happily playing to come in here and post a problem????
Civ 3 is an awesome game, and for the small amount of issues I've come across, i'm very happy!

I can't speak for "people like [me]", but I personally am aware of things such as selection bias in sampling, believe you me. I have read many comments, positive and negative, in many different places, so I realize that many think very highly of CivIII. However, it is crystal clear from a wide reading that the release was bug-infested and premature. I am not saying anything about the general value of the game. I would merely like to see developers release properly tested and quality-controlled products, and I proposed a way to give developers incentive to do so (or rather a disincentive not to do so).

You're probably right that I shouldn't complain without having tested the product myself. I am *assuming* that the sheer number of issues raised here and elsewhere indicates that serious problems exist (you are right--insert cliche here about assuming things). As I stated above, I'll find out for myself when the Mac port is released.

As for buying the game *and* getting a life, it would seem that the two are mutually exclusive. Lost a lot of time to CivII.

In favor of Firaxis, I'd like to say that they appear (judging from the unit balance thread) to be interested and listening to what their customers are saying. Should they continue free-of-charge support via a series of patches, I will acknowledge that I am wrong about their motives, and I will be quite happy to be wrong.

[GeorgePauley]

No coal anywhere

Hi,

I downloaded the v1.16f (the 2nd one) patch. Since then I have (attempted) to play 3 games (huge map, 8 civs). In each game, after I have discovered steam power, there is never any coal. No coal in my controlled area, and no coal in any other civ either. By the time I get to steam, the 8 civs pretty much have the entire map covered. I did not have this problem until I downloaded the patch. Before the patch, I would often not have coal myself, but could always find some civ willing to trade it to me (usually at extortionary prices), but now there is no coal anywhere.

Am I the only one who has seen this? Help! Firxas, please fix this. I am just about ready to uninstall the patch.

Thanks in advance.

[Colonel Kraken]

Originally posted by solo
1. No more trading of cities? The AI never consider it after the patch.

I didn't have the game before the patch, but I think it's curious that when I'm allies with a civ and I liberate one of his cities and offer to give it back to him, he refuses! Sometimes if I offer it for nothing in return the AI will take it. If I ask them what they will give me in exchange for the city, I get the, "That cannot be done at this time" or some such response. Not even 1 gold? Come on. Why would the AI refuse taking a city back that he formerly had? This happens also, of course, when I offer an ally a city that, although not formerly his, it is a city that is next to his borders and would connect contiguously with his empire. Why would the AI refuse to accept such a gift?

Is this a design decision? Hmmm . . . . I like to play the nice, benevolent civ, but this makes it kind of difficult.

2. I tried a right-click on the foreign advisor screen in a 4-civ game and a blue oval appeared where one of the AI might, if there had been more of them. Right afterwards, all lines disappeared and never came back, rendering the screen useless.

I had a similar problem. After discovering the French, they did not show up in the foreign advisor screen. After wiggling the mouse pointer over the area where Joan's mug should have been I got a green disk to show up. After goofing around for a while and left-clicking in the green disk, Joan's face finally showed up. Wierd.

[gnome]

Re: Small Setup Bug

Originally posted by Biggles266
Has anyone else noticed this?

If I start my PC and then run Civ3, on the next boot or restart I get the message:

__________________________________
Please wait while Setup updates your configuration files. This may take a few minutes...


Completed updating files, contiunuing to load Windows...
__________________________________

To test, turn on your PC. Do not run anything. Restart. Watch for message while booting. Run Civ3. Quit. Restart PC. Watch for message while booting. I can reproduce this without fail.

Now I know this isn't much of a big deal but it takes my system boot time (from the Starting Windows 98... bit) from 13 seconds up to about 14 or 15 seconds so I don't like it.

This happened to me on my machine, and on a friends' machine. But it was happening before the patch, also.

Anyone know what this is about?

[Unregistered]

Originally posted by Colonel Kraken

I didn't have the game before the patch, but I think it's curious that when I'm allies with a civ and I liberate one of his cities and offer to give it back to him, he refuses! Sometimes if I offer it for nothing in return the AI will take it. If I ask them what they will give me in exchange for the city, I get the, "That cannot be done at this time" or some such response. Not even 1 gold? Come on. Why would the AI refuse taking a city back that he formerly had? This happens also, of course, when I offer an ally a city that, although not formerly his, it is a city that is next to his borders and would connect contiguously with his empire. Why would the AI refuse to accept such a gift?

Is this a design decision? Hmmm . . . . I like to play the nice, benevolent civ, but this makes it kind of difficult.

Pre-patch they would at least offer you something for the city & sometimes you'd have to stick w/ the offer to get them to take it, but now it is a matter of just giving it away to them for free. Pretty bloody silly. I will admit that I was kinda using it to balance out the deals of the type "If you want our coal you'll have to give us 1500 gold, rocketry, computers, furs and 250 per turn". Some of these guys are really proud of their stuff. Yet at the same time, if I offer them something like steel or aluminum, the best they'll offer me is something like territory map.

Gripe, gripe. I must admit, usually it isn't that bad. But they do seem a little bit biased against the human when making deals, at least when playing monarch.

Grumble,

[vincentz]

Dr.K: Glad to hear your post. Have any opinion you want based on what you hear, but IMHO CIV III rocks the very foundation of even Rock and Roll. And yes, CIV III would be much cooler if it had been bug free.

No comment on assumptions.

And in our world, you don't have a life until you have spent 20% of it with keyboard marks on your forehead from overplaying CIV.

And on the note of waiting until it was totally tested before release: What would 90% of Civ fans say if they came out in September saying it will be delayed 2 months for more testing?