If you want Firaxis to listen.....

[Redstar]

there ya go

"In this case it's because you're setup to get neither email or private messages. I don't have the time to stay current every day on every thread...."

Well said . I would say this proves Firaxis is paying attention and addressing those issues within its mandate.


We just have to be patient and practise more zen.

[ACooper]

Thank you for answering Jeff. It's what I was trying to explain.

[Ming]

Let's remember folks...

IT IS SIMPLY IMPOSSIBLE TO READ EVERY THREAD AND WORD PRINTED HERE. (I'm a mod, and I don't even claim I can do that )

I've read so many rants that Firaxis isn't responding to their questions. As pointed out above by Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS, they may not have seen it.

But my favorite line from Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS is OH SO TRUE!

I won't often respond to emails concerning:...

b) rants (if I can't find the legitimate question in 5 paragraphs of froth...)

It's simple human nature to ignore questions that are impossible to understand because they are buried under tons of rants and raves.

Maybe people should keep that in mind when they post their questions here.

[nato]

Yeah it is only polite to keep it short and to the point. Besides it increases your chances of being listened to.

I sent in my idea because I think it is a reasonable and good one. It was 4 lines of type total and a "Thanks for reading!" at the end. Go for something like that instead of a rant.

[Trifna]

The forum should be for everyone, not only people that think Firaxis made a very good game. Of course, it is a good thing to limit those who are posting the same stuff over and over, with no positive advance, which is useless and a waste of my time.

But i have to say that Firaxis made some things I'm woundering what's the big deal about it. They concepts behind Civ III are so much more promising than what they delivered. I mean that some simple things (stacking, etc.) were evdent and not done. Combat never have been as weird as it is now, balance is as a beta, etc. Can't say it's perfect, so I'm asking myself why. And this is what I reflect on the forums, which are our gaming community mirror.

[Libertarian]

I have not ever ranted against Firaxis. Not thrice. Not twice. Not even once.

Moreover, it seemed to me that this (and CivFanatics) is where they are answering questions. Cherry-picking, to be sure, but answering. It makes no sense to correspond by private message on such matters as stack movement, a concern of the whole community.

Do you mean to say that if I'd had PM turned on, you would have answered me privately, but would not have answered for the whole community to see? What would that mean to me, then? That I would have been held to secrecy? Or would have been expected to copy/paste your response here?

Why not just post a teensy line or two here? Why the tedious run-around?

• We're implementing a form of stack movement, and will advise everyone soon.
• We think late game tedium adds to the experience.
• Leave us alone.

Finally, I can understand that a person cannot read every thread. But that's a red herring. When a thread's very title includes "Questions for Firaxis" — and its originator is the man who defended you and yours against all assailants — then ignoring it is a clear message of "get the hell off our side".

[Libertarian]

Gah. The more I think about it, the more bizarre your post was, Jeff.

If you had the time to chastise me here, why didn't you just answer the question?

[Dev]

You get one guess.....

In other related news my mouse informs me that it has abandoned the click abusing Civ3 game for the greener pastures of EU2.


/dev

[DaveV]

Originally posted by Libertarian
Gah. The more I think about it, the more bizarre your post was, Jeff.

If you had the time to chastise me here, why didn't you just answer the question?

No offense, but it seems to me he did:

Originally posted by Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS
a) feature requests we're well aware of or are impossible.

You may recall a small controversy about editors and multiplayer capabilities after Firaxians posted something like "We're implementing a form of xxx, and will advise everyone soon". People start piling on with questions like: "what are you doing with xxx?" "Why isn't xxx done yet?" "Your game sux, here's how to fix it!" I am astounded at the patience of the Firaxians in dealing with the outright abuse they've endured, particularly in this forum.

Again, I'm not trying to offend you here, but does defending Firaxis in some of the threads entitle you to special treatment by them? These boards consist of people expressing their opinions. Either they think the game is great, terrible, or somewhere in the middle. Although most people fall into the third category, the first two categories are the ones who are motivated to keep posting here. You don't automatically become the buddy of everyone at Firaxis by joining the first group.

Firaxis is trying to run a business, and must allocate scarce resources in such a way as to maximize their profits. Once they've saturated the market, any additional investment into the game has pretty sketchy returns (like the nebulous concept of "goodwill"). They have shown a lot of enthusiasm and support for this game so far, and I'm optimistic that they'll add in the features they've said they will.

Sorry again for the diatribe. It bothers me when people here think that Firaxis owes them an answer to a question. Firaxis is, in my opinion, showing a commendable level of support and an amazing forbearance.

[nato]

I don't know DaveV. That argument would make much more sense if they actually responded more often and gave out more info.

I am not bashing. I just do not think Firaxis is really worthy of either bashing or your high level of praise.

After all it really does not take much to simply ignore almost everything others say, which is what Firaxis usually does.

[Libertarian]

No problem, Dave. All I wanted was an answer to the question.

Mind you, it wasn't a question that only I had. So far, three threads have been opened on the topic of group movement. Each one, including the current one, has been deluged with practically unanimous support from the players, stating their desire for the feature. They've stated unequivocally that lack of it seriously impedes their enjoyment of the game — the game that Firaxis is developing.

Now, you say that Jeff has answered this question. I see not one penumbra — yea, nary an interstice! — in Jeff's post that even remotely addresses group movement. I acquiesce to your superior reading comprehension. I will ask you simply because inquiring minds want to know: what was his answer to the question?

[Expatriate]

Originally posted by Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS I don't have the time to stay current every day on every thread, so if you have a question, forget support@firaxis.com and send it to jmorris@firaxis.com.

So youre saying that the email adress thats supposed to be used for support issues is basically useless because noone bothers to check it once in a while? Why not remove it completly?

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

If you are following the proper and established channels, you are not emailing Firaxis for support, you're emailing Infogrames. I posted a rather lengthy thread on CivFanatics about this last night. I won't rehash it all here, but the general point was that Infogrames is your support contact for Civ III. They're set up to handle the thousands and thousands of support inquiries and questions, we, as a small company of about 30 people, are not.

And no, this doesn't mean we don't care or that we're somehow trying to pass something off on Infogrames that we should be dealing with ourselves: it's part of the contract, it's their responsibility to handle support.

We do the best we can to answer all the emails that come in to us, some of which are general questions, and some of which are real support issues, but Infogrames are the organization you should be contacting for support.

And FYI, I check the various email boxes every day; frequently there are more than 400 messages in them. I respond to as many as I can on a daily basis but there is no way I can get to them all (though not for lack of trying).

Dan

[DaveV]

Originally posted by Libertarian
I will ask you simply because inquiring minds want to know: what was his answer to the question?

That he's not going to answer. If he says "we're looking into that", it opens a huge can of worms. He said he won't respond to questions about "feature requests we're well aware of or are impossible". Whether stack movement is the former or the latter is left to our imagination, I guess.

[Libertarian]

Dan,

With respect to the issue of group movement, no one is asking for support. What we are asking for is an answer. Clearly, you do not intend to offer the courtesy of a reply.

I'm afraid that if we ask Infogrames this question, they might tell us to build a port.

Dave,

Thanks. I think I get it now.