My Conclusions about the Firaxis-Community relations

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by Ozymandous

Hmm, maybe some fan's are as naoorw-sighted as you and some of us actually look at this as the same type game but with slightly different rules. Seems to me there is a lot more positive feedback than negative, at least off this website and from those who aren't as naive to think that their every wish will be granted...

Regarding how negative fan support will hurt a games sales. Remember Diablo? Ever heard of Diablo2? That game was in design and development for over three years and still came out broken. Most of the "hard-core" fans thought it was a joke but some still played and had fun with how the game WAS and not HOW THEY WANTED IT TO BE. Oh yeah and that game sold over 2 million copies.

Moral: Just because you, "Joe Blow" don't like the game doesn't mean that the "silent majority" won't or don't.

So what your saying 3.8 million sales is better than a potential 5 million? From a marketing aspect, I'm going to have to disagree with you. Sure, they wont be able to please all their fans, but a good marketing policy has always been to keep as much customer support as possible. And what you say, implies that they should pay attention to the posative and content consumers and ignore the other 200,000 unhappy consumers because they're lesser than the overall sale? I'm sorry, but if I designed a game, I would pay more attention to what was wrong with my game, rather than what is right with it. So that I could perfect the product and increase sales. Dont you agree?

Sorry I thought both Diablo's sucked. I'm not into mindless RPG style hack'n slash games. I like games where you have to think. And I've been on several boards, and non-civ boards and I can tell you the negative complaints are growing. And it all seems to be related to the same similar problems with the game. Like no real editor for scenarios, and game blips. And I agree, no game company should have to live up to "every wish fullfilled" as that is impossible. But they should come as close to that as possible. I read the ideas that were suggested, and Firaxis ignored alot of those great ideas that would've made Civ3 an even better game.

Since when do we stop thriving for perfection? Get the best for our dollar? Anyway thats my opinion based on "play-tested facts".

Charles.

[CharlesUFarley]

Re: This is amusing...

Originally posted by Ozymandous

Translation:
"Dan, I was one of your most ardent supporters, but, well, you didn't treat me special, you didn't treat me any better than one of the other 100,000 people who bought the game and sent an email or posted a question so now I hate you and will do all I can to punish you and your company!

"Signed, fiar-weather Fred."

• Does Firaxis understand that some sort of group movement would help alleviate late-game tedium?
• Does Firaxis understand that this is a UNANIMOUS request from the playing community?
• Is Firaxis looking at doing this at all, or is it just not on the list right now?

That's it. Please, straightforward answers. Thanks in advance.

Translation:
"Please, please, please answer my questions! I am all antsy with the buring desire and uncontrollable need to know everything even though you have already address me at least twice in this thread and said you have said all you could. Your attention alone isn't enough, you *must* also answer all my questions of I will lose hope and heart and be forced (even though I really do like to bash you. ) to bash you some more.

Please, please pay more attention to me so that I won't feel so alone in the world and my life will have meaning. I love you Dan, I really do. ""

Oz, knock it off man. Grow up a little. These people spent the money and invested many years of their lives in the wake of a Sid Meier's product. Don't you think that gives them enough rights to at least express themselves, even if it's negative? Why cut them down, your only revealing yourself as an insecure result of what happens to those who read (oh god forbid) a "negative review".
Believe me, your not helping matters, or Firaxis for that matter. One way or another they'll hear whats wrong with the game. So drop the hero routine.

Charles.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by Xentropy
Even so, given the posts I've read from you, your attempt at claiming to have been joking around appears insincere. Looks more like you realized you made a mistake and were trying to cover your tracks. Since that is the ONLY debate I've ever really tried to have with you, and since I'm fairly new to this forum, I have NEVER seen you use good debate form.

First of all, this isn't a "debate" forum, its a place where we all come to "vent" our issues and try and learn more about the product itself. And I for one completely agree with all of yin's concepts, because I have personally experienced the same problems and issues with Firaxis. Weren't you paying attention?

Some people in this thread have called you a "fellow fan, worth listening to." As someone who has only read your posts from this calendar month, I don't think you're a fan at all, and certainly not worth listening to.

Sounds to me that you dont listen to anyone. Maybe you should come out of that state of ignorance and listen to why people are complaining you could better understand us. I'd be happy to explain why I think Firaxis flopped Civ3. And other issues.

Charles.

[Xentropy]

[Xentropy]

Re: Re: Warning: Off topic post ahead!

Originally posted by CharlesUFarley
You're doing it again. These are NOT opinions. These are "design flaws" and "lack of features" that people are complaining about. When your friend's car breaks down, and he explains his car situation to you, do you turn to him and say "Its only your opinion that the car's broken down!" C'mon! These are facts.

A "design flaw" is by definition flawed by opinion, not fact. Even an overwhelming majority opinion is still an opinion. If every single person on the face of the Earth except Bob from New Jersey believed cats were evil, would that make it a fact? No, but if cats went around killing people on a regular basis, that would. Facts are based on raw data, opinions are based on beliefs. (Granted, it could be argued that there are no facts, since even raw data merely comes from the way an individual's senses gather information, and there's no guarantee what I think blue looks like is what you think blue looks like, but I don't want to get philosophical here, and my point is *not* to make everything an opinion . . . )

I don't argue that stating a certain feature does not exist is a fact. But stating you believe it SHOULD exist is your opinion.

You are, in fact, using bad debate form in your post there, as well. There is absolutely no comparison between the statements, "Corruption breaks Civ3," and "My car is broken down." In one case, there is visible evidence. The car will not start. In the other, there may be reasons, but no absolute proof. I can run my game, I can play my game, I can enjoy my game, despite the way corruption works. It doesn't break *my* Civ3. It is in dispute. It is not a fact.

Basically, "my car will not run," is a fact, but, "my car is useless in its current state," is an opinion. Sure, an opinon almost everyone would agree with, but an opinion nonetheless.

Another example, since you and yin seem to have a problem with this concept:

Fact: Corruption makes it very difficult to run a large empire, settle other continents, or take over enemy cities and make any real use of them.

Opinion: The above effects of corruption make the game worse.

Facts are the way the game responds, opinions are whether or not YOU like those responses.

Do you understand, or do I need to give more examples?

[yin26]

Xentropy: Get over yourself. You talk about good debate form blah blah blah and then simply patronize. If that's the best you've got, don't waste my time.

[XPav]

Originally posted by CharlesUFarley

"**** the community" where did you get your business policy from, the bathroom stall of your favorite pub? The community, incase you didn't know, is where the ****** profit comes from!

So in other words, it doesnt matter what the consumers think, just sell the damn thing. Your incredible pal.

You're my incredible pal?

The "community" is a fraction of the people that buy the game. The community wants to become involved with the creation of the next game, however, the community cannot take "NO" for an answer. At this point, elements of the community go on a rampage, attacking those developers that have volunteered to interact with this community. Not to mention that they aren't full (or even part) time PR people, and add that to the fact the developer/publisher relationship that many people don't understand, and what do you have?

Its playing with fire, and the consequent morale hit and time-sucking that dealing with some morons that call you personally all sort of names isn't worth it. One can only be called an unethical evil money grubbing man SO much before one just says "screw it", and goes away.

The profit of Civ3 does NOT come from the people on apolyton or civfanatics. How many people are there here?

So that would make you what.. an expert?

Err, when it comes to the affect of community relations on a small development team... well, yes.

[HalfLotus]

Ozy & Steve Clark, I love you guys.

While we're sharing family anecdotes:

I went to an anger management class with my younger brother recently. He's a punk teenager. We spent most of the class talking about the desires and expectations of the "angry children".

The leading cause of anger was the "I want what I want, and I want it now." syndrome. The kids got frustrated when they didn't get their way, and lashed out against parents, teachers, etc.

The similarities between the "angry children" and many of the folks on this thread are unmistakable.

[yin26]

Yeah, that's why some of us have been here for over two years and are willing to wait another year for the game to be worth playing. Yep. That's impatience for you.

[Steve Clark]

Gee, yin, in the past two years, I have:
- played a computer games for a couple of hours most nights
- played about 15 different games during that time
- read probably over 100 books (mostly fiction and non-fiction history)
- completed three major outdoor projects (about 100+ hours each)
- took a few trips with my wife and/or my son
- completed about 8 major projects at work, and getting 3 raises and 2 bonuses for it
- wasted time at work posting to game forums
- played with my son for countless of hours

and while I am interested in civing, it is low on my priority list when compared to the more important things I do (as it should be). Regardless of the time and effort one spends in pursuit of a game, I believe a proper perspective on life's priorities would produce a better mindset, including myself.

[yin26]

As I have said many times, I am one of the busiest people I know. Honestly. Are you, once again, pretending to assume you know things about me that you don't?

While I agree with your conclusion that computer games should have a low priority, what makes you think they have a high priority for me ... or that I am somehow not doing many other important things?

My list of accomplishments over the past 5 years is pretty astounding, and the next 5 years promise me much more. Is it so hard to imagine a very successful and happy person who ALSO has time to criticize and hold out hope for a game that failed to deliver?

My list would be longer than yours, by the way, if this is meant to be a pissing content.

[CharlesUFarley]

Re: Re: Re: Warning: Off topic post ahead!

Originally posted by Xentropy
A "design flaw" is by definition flawed by opinion, not fact. Even an overwhelming majority opinion is still an opinion. If every single person on the face of the Earth except Bob from New Jersey believed cats were evil, would that make it a fact? No, but if cats went around killing people on a regular basis, that would. Facts are based on raw data, opinions are based on beliefs. (Granted, it could be argued that there are no facts, since even raw data merely comes from the way an individual's senses gather information, and there's no guarantee what I think blue looks like is what you think blue looks like, but I don't want to get philosophical here, and my point is *not* to make everything an opinion . . . )

Oh I can't believe you went there, ok here it is...

I'm sorry you don't get it. Allow me to enlighten you. As a fan I heard about Civ3 as soon as it hit the ads. And I was first in line at the store to purchase a copy, all excited and what not. Then after installing and several hours of play-testing I came to the conclusion that the articles prior to the release of the game, were not only exagerated but lies. Allow me to explain this for you, since your struggling with what is FACT and what isn't. Take the editor for example, it was promised (and I quote) "an un-presidented editor, with greatly expanded scenario building tools"... my wording might be slightly off. Lets analyze this, "Greatly expanded scenario building tools" how the **** are we supposed to design a scenario if we can't even place starting locations.. sure I can make a scenario if I don't mind playing the ancient romans in south america. And what about this one, you can't add/edit/delete any information inside the editor (well succesfully anyway). Suppose I wished to design a scenario based on a movie, how would I create the units and atmosphere of that movie without being able to "add" units? Oh and here's another one, you can zoom in and out inside the game with "ctrl-z" but try zooming in/out inside the map editor to see what kind of a map your drawing, how are we supposed to draw a map without seeing the "overall" ? And if you didn't care much for those ones, how about this... how come at any difficulty level the AI always seems to have units in newly built cities, know why? Let me educate you, because the AI is programmed to have "FREE" units apon city construction. How realistic is that? And Civ3 has been awarded for realism and historical value! Want me to go on.... ? I suppose you don't.... too bad I'm going to give you a list.... At this point I expect you to put on your blinders, and hit the "stubborn/ignorant" switch.

- Cannot edit/add/delete improvements/units or any other graphics without !@#$ something up. How are we supposed to create new units for a scenario outside what the game provides? We can't! Sort of defeats the perpose eh?

- Cannot edit/add/delete new sound FX or music to make your scenario more relistic. You're stuck with ancient drums beating away in a MODERN scenario.

- Cannot Zoom in multiple levels, or see what kind of map your creating in the editor, NO ZOOM at all. Seems rediculous to me. No, you don't think THATS a design flaw? C'mon!

- Cannot add special events to take place through-out your so called scenario. Oh, I know what your going to say, its a "feature" not a design flaw... ok so tell me this wise guy, if I were to build a World War 2 scenario (not that the map would look like earth anyway) how would I have repeated "events" like pearl harbor getting bombed? Put some thought into it!

- Cannot add new civilizations, leaders (bush, caesar etc) because the game doesn't accept those kinds of changes in the editor. So how do I create a new civilization? You can't!

Still not convinced? Thats five major design flaws, NOT lacking features. When you create a map, you should be able to zoom out and see the WHOLE map when it's done. When you "design a scenario" in an "un-presidented editor" (cough) then you should be able to add/edit and remove things to give it realsm and effect. Otherwise there's no point in creating the @$'ing scenario in the first place. Yeah sure, they have some "mods" to do some of these things now, BIG DEAL. Should people have to take up the slack where Firaxis' left off? These are "design flaws" or "lack of design" and its not opinion, and it's not lacking features, these are things that come with the editor, or the editor really isn't an editor. And you cannot design scenarios without altering something, how do you explain that one? You would only make a fool of yourself to try.

I don't argue that stating a certain feature does not exist is a fact. But stating you believe it SHOULD exist is your opinion.

I agree entirely. But if you clearly read what I said above, then you know that what I'm talking about is FACT. Not opinion. For example, what good would "pac man" be without walls? Or, what good would Command&Conquer be without "ranged weapons"? Oh, here's a real good one... what good would Civ3 be without the ability to create scenarios, or edit the rules? Think about it. These are the components that make these games popular, and all I'm saying is, sure "Civ3" runs good the way it is... but the very thing that made it so popular was the ability to build scenarios. In fact the Civ-Web-Sites derived from scenario building itself. And when they advertised Civ3 they gloated about the new and advanced expanded supercalifragalistic techno editor that was supposed to shock the civ-community. well it didn't! And you sit there criticizing this community because they dont like what Civilization has now become? Not smart.

You are, in fact, using bad debate form in your post there, as well. There is absolutely no comparison between the statements, "Corruption breaks Civ3," and "My car is broken down." In one case, there is visible evidence. The car will not start. In the other, there may be reasons, but no absolute proof. I can run my game, I can play my game, I can enjoy my game, despite the way corruption works. It doesn't break *my* Civ3. It is in dispute. It is not a fact.

Basically, "my car will not run," is a fact, but, "my car is useless in its current state," is an opinion. Sure, an opinon almost everyone would agree with, but an opinion nonetheless.

"Bad debate form" ? Is that why your here, to debate and tell people how to debate? I wasn't just talking about the "corruption" I was also talking about the "customizability" factors. But if your only playing Civ3 for a few kicks, and you never get bored of the same 16 empires over and over, knock yourself out. But some of us actually like to challenge ourselves with "creating" and "designing" scenarios to add flavour to the game. And thats good that you like the game, but do I care? I'm not here to tell people not to play Civ3, (one more time) I'm here to discuss the design flaws not "opinions". Because frankly, I dont really care what others think of the game. I'm here to discuss my issues with Firaxis, and hopefully gain some information. Simple as that.

Another example, since you and yin seem to have a problem with this concept:

Fact: Corruption makes it very difficult to run a large empire, settle other continents, or take over enemy cities and make any real use of them.

Opinion: The above effects of corruption make the game worse.

Facts are the way the game responds, opinions are whether or not YOU like those responses.

Do you understand, or do I need to give more

"squeeze me" ? I never said that I couldn't play Civilization III, there you go putting words in people's mouths again. I SAID that the game is full of bugs (like corruption for one) and lacks any real editor with scenario design capability. Can you read? Or shall I repeat it? I never at any time said that the game is bad, or that people shouldn't play it. You're just twisting things. If I were to say "Civilization III sucks" then I would be stating opinion, but I'm not, I'm simply saying that they sold us a lousy version of it. And again that's opinion. But the "reason(s)" for it being lousy, are based on "design-flaws" which are FACTS (want more proof? let me know!) not opinions. I'm not talking about the color of the box that it was sold in, I'm talking about the incomplete editor, and lack of scenario design.. for the last time.

Charles.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by XPav
You're my incredible pal?

Its called sarcasm. Look it up.

The "community" is a fraction of the people that buy the game. The community wants to become involved with the creation of the next game, however, the community cannot take "NO" for an answer. At this point, elements of the community go on a rampage, attacking those developers that have volunteered to interact with this community. Not to mention that they aren't full (or even part) time PR people, and add that to the fact the developer/publisher relationship that many people don't understand, and what do you have?

I agree that the presence of fans screaming and insulting, is not going to change things. You completely missed my point though. People aren't doing this to gain favor with Firaxis, or "change" things. People are doing this because they're upset with Civ3. And its not unlikely for someone to curse a game company at one time or another. "Let the person without sin, cast the first stone". You sit here and plagiarize how people don't have a right to "insult software designers" but we pay them to write software for us, essentially. I think that gives us the right to "vent" if were not pleased. Can you honestly stop something as simple as human emotion? I'm sorry but not everyone explodes when they recieve rejection (or the answer NO). You're categorizing everyone for the actions of a small group of short tempered people. And you are wrong for that. And I disagree with you, when you say "we are a small majority of the sales" you dont know anything about that area, unless you work for Firaxis. And I've been on every existing board with a Civ-Topic, and I've seen the masses. Not to mention the 5 or 6 retail outlets I visit often as a regular consumer, whom are always abliged to give me information about sales. But you're not going to be happy until someone from Firaxis actually admits that all this is affecting their sales, will you? No, your only stating your opinion. And if you think you can convince people with your weak notions of "how people should behave in a forum" then your either a lawyer for Firaxis, or someone who has nothing better to do but pick "forum-wars" with someone who's already upset due to the obvious disapointments of Civ3. Well in that case, your my hero!

Its playing with fire, and the consequent morale hit and time-sucking that dealing with some morons that call you personally all sort of names isn't worth it. One can only be called an unethical evil money grubbing man SO much before one just says "screw it", and goes away.

"playing with fire" ? I didn't know my computer would catch on fire for writing how I feel about a game, in a forum. And now you are dictating what sort of names, and remarks people are allowed to use when addressing game designers. These people don't know each other, so forums are painless. And second any game designer with "integrity" simply ignores it anyway, like you said "screw it, goes away". So what are YOU *****ing about? That these people are using obscenities in a public forum, and it offends you? Or that these people in your opinion have no right to say what they feel? You're sounding more and more like dictator, telling people what they should say, and how they should say it. Are you related to a member of Firaxis, does it make you cry everytime someone insults them? I think you should let people say what they want, leave it up to the moderators, and Firaxis to decide what the want to censor or see. Got it?

The profit of Civ3 does NOT come from the people on apolyton or civfanatics. How many people are there here?

This is true. I agree. But with the amount of profit that these people represent is enough dent the sales. And even the smallest group of fans waving pitchforks and torches is enough to create bad publicity for a game company. And if you ran your business otherwise, you would be losing money. But perhaps you don't regard that? But basically, every single human being that purchases a copy of the game, is a brick off the foundation. And its without a doubt the priority of any serious minded company. So what you say makes no sense at all. Negative reviews lead to loss of sales, your saying thats okay? I don't think even Firaxis would agree with you on that one.

Err, when it comes to the affect of community relations on a small development team... well, yes.

I'm sorry but I don't agree on that one. First of all, no one has heard of you, and no one cares. And unless your the president of the united states, or a member of Firaxis... who cares! Your opinion has no affect on the other countless numbers of upset fans floating around on the boards. Not to mention the thousands more that dont even have the "internet" or the means to communicate what they feel. You're forgetting the silent market, people who don't have the ability to review the game and talk about it. Or they just simply choose not to. And if I was a game company I would take even 100 angry fans seriously. Because whether you admit it or not, that does affect sales.

My point: People have a right to say what they want, when they want, and to get in the way of that is only making things worse!
Speech is free. Its called a "movement" for a reason, it moves! And you stand boldly trying to stop it, like a peasant to a tank.

Charles.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by HalfLotus
Ozy & Steve Clark, I love you guys.

While we're sharing family anecdotes:

I went to an anger management class with my younger brother recently. He's a punk teenager. We spent most of the class talking about the desires and expectations of the "angry children".

The leading cause of anger was the "I want what I want, and I want it now." syndrome. The kids got frustrated when they didn't get their way, and lashed out against parents, teachers, etc.

The similarities between the "angry children" and many of the folks on this thread are unmistakable.

I see.. we can buy the product, but if we tell the company that produced the product that we're not happy with it were called "whining children".

Real intelligence behind that statement. Coming from a person who attends "anger managment" you of all people should respect someone who has to vent thier anger. Or do you attend anger management so you can tell all the other people that they aren't allowed to get angry? Aren't you supposed to make sense?

Charles.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by Steve Clark
Gee, yin, in the past two years, I have:
- played a computer games for a couple of hours most nights
- played about 15 different games during that time
- read probably over 100 books (mostly fiction and non-fiction history)
- completed three major outdoor projects (about 100+ hours each)
- took a few trips with my wife and/or my son
- completed about 8 major projects at work, and getting 3 raises and 2 bonuses for it
- wasted time at work posting to game forums
- played with my son for countless of hours

and while I am interested in civing, it is low on my priority list when compared to the more important things I do (as it should be). Regardless of the time and effort one spends in pursuit of a game, I believe a proper perspective on life's priorities would produce a better mindset, including myself.

"And a partridge in a pear tree...."

News flash everyone this is the new "Steve Clark Accomplishments Forum". No one asked you what you've accomplished, and no offense... but I dont think anyone really cares either. You claim not to focus priorities on this forum or the game itself, yet you came all the way in here to tell us all that? Wow, I guess you can add that to your acheivements list! Thanks for the big tip dad, but I think I'll decide what I want to devote my energies to during non-work hours.

A voice from the counter: "Move along, move along!"

Charles.