Confused about people quiting Civ3

[rah]

Steve Clark MP better be worth the wait.

I fall in the middle, I don't love the game, and I don't hate the game. I'm frustrated but I'm still enjoying it. The frustration will probably hurt replayability. The main reason I'm playing is to figure out how the game will need to be changed for MP to be as if not more successful as CIV II was. If we don't play and make suggestions, then we deserve whatever we get for MP. (hopefully they will listen) But if we don't suggest, they can't listen.

RAH
Still the optimist.

[dainbramaged13]

Re: Re: Confused about people quiting Civ3

Originally posted by Deornwulf


I think that many of the issues others have with the game have nothing to do with parts of the game that can be edited. Bugs and crashes are what cause most of the discontent.

wtf?
what bugs?
what crashes?
i havent had one yet and im running one of the worst machines of anyone on the site!

your wrong about that tho.
90% of complaints ive heard are fixable in the editor.
amen brakner

[Code Monkey]

Originally posted by CapTVK
If a few tweaks in the standard rules of Civ3 makes it more fun, why didn't Firaxis do it in the first place? To allow the buyer to have some fun editing the game?

-Nope, more probably it was due to the christmas deadline -

Add to that the fact that you changed the standard rules to fit your personal profile proves that the standard isn't properly playtested to begin with.

Give me a freakin' break

All it proves is why no one hardly bothers to make turn-based games anymore: a major chunk of the potential audience is a bunch of self-important wannabe grognards with their heads up their a$s who couldn't be pleased if the game came with a $50 bill tucked inside the box.

I mean, gods forbid a game designer both puts in a serious effort at making a decent game in a dying genre and ships it with an editor that lets people configure it to their liking since they know people are looking for different game experiences.

Would you people be happier if they had integrated the editor as "game options", would that make it transparent and official enough for you? Because, in the end, that's all it is: one big monster list of game options which can be abused but can also be used to tweak 'til its just right for you no matter how much of a hardass you are.

[Kolyana]

Originally posted by Rhuarc
I agree completely with you guys, the game was made to be changed. People say they want to play it like the designers intended it to be played, without modding. So maybe if you still don't like it, then you just don't like the game. It is just a matter of personal preference!! I know I know, people who are talking about bugs and crashes I understand, but for those of you who complain about gameplay issues either edit the game already or quit complaining!

Rhu, I'd like an Airport improvement please. I'd like it to be a terrain i9mprovement, something workers can create, and i'd like airplanes to be able to use it as an airbase. It has zero zone of control.

Then I'd like my outposts to have a 1 square zone of control to stop them being aquired by enemy cities.

Then i'd like a new civilization, without destroying any other civ ... perhaps the Spanish. This would give me 17 civs, right?

Stacked movement would be nice, can you point that out in the editor please?

Oh, yeah, and I hate the way the game ends in 2050 and I'd prefer to have significant future techs. If the editor can handle that, please do feel free to point it out.

No, I don't expect firaxis to write this for me, but apparently that's what the editor is for ...

Now, care to show me how?

Oh no, wait ... it can't do any of that can it?

[CapTVK]

Originally posted by rah
Steve Clark MP better be worth the wait.

If we don't play and make suggestions, then we deserve whatever we get for MP. (hopefully they will listen) But if we don't suggest, they can't listen.

RAH
Still the optimist.

Well said Rah, but for the moment Civ3 isn't properly balanced for SP. And we need a proper, well laid out, ruleset before we can even talk about MP otherwise we would be dealing with dozens of variants when (IF) MP is released.



And the window of opportunity to make improvements/suggestions is slowly closing. Civ3 is running out of steam...

[Brakner]

CapTVK maybe your right , maybe it should have been better out of the box but it wasnt, I dont mind it that much but others do. Instead of fixing it with the editor so they can enjoy it ( and get the most out of there 50 bucks ) they shelve it and spend all day trashing it on the forums. In less that 1 hour i can turn my Civ3 into Civ2 with exactly the same rules and units. I dont understand people who say its changed to much from Civ2 then say they cant do what they want to do in the Editor to fix it.. Maybe they arnt looking in the right places or they havnt even tried.

[CapTVK]

Originally posted by Code Monkey


Give me a freakin' break

All it proves is why no one hardly bothers to make turn-based games anymore: a major chunk of the potential audience is a bunch of self-important wannabe grognards with their heads up their a$s who couldn't be pleased if the game came with a $50 bill tucked inside the box.

Ehmmm Code Monkey, you do know what a grognard means do you? If someone wants to tweak the game rules it's almost certainly going to be a grognard. Hell, they don't even need an editor, they'll simply change things with a hex or basic text editor. Just like most scenario makers did with Civ2. At the moment they're stuck with Civ3 because you need to use in the inbuild editor.

I mean, gods forbid a game designer both puts in a serious effort at making a decent game in a dying genre and ships it with an editor that lets people configure it to their liking since they know people are looking for different game experiences.

May I direct your attention to Freeciv and Civ Evolution then. If you want games to edit to your own liking you'll find them there. Best of all, they're free (as in libre)!

I do suggest trying out Andreas native windows client for Freeciv BTW. It isn't finished yet, but it's quite playable now. Civ Evolution is also very nice when it comes to creating your own units inside the game itself and has some interesting WoW's.

[Brakner]

Kolyana were all those things suppose to be in Civ3? Were they in Civ2? So what your saying is you want the game to be the way you want it not the way they designed it? Stacked movement would be wonderfull !! but i wasnt expecting it because i didnt see it on the features page before release. The only change i would want in the game is the ability to unload your army components to upgrade them the reload them.

[felder]

I'm sure this has already been said, but I think there are really two reasons why people are talking about shelving or returning civ3 even though there's an editor.

1. Many people feel that they shouldn't have to edit the game to get it to work right. This stems from the fact that many aspects of the game obviously weren't play tested. I and quite a few other people are bit resentful that we are paying to be beta testers for the game (although I haven't shelved the game, lack of play testing is quite obvious I think). In addition, Some of the changes, while they may be implementable in the editor (corruption, combat) do require quite a bit of fooling with the editor. After the changes are made, the game still doesn't feel right because the changes are really hacks at best.

2. Despite what many would have us believe, not all the problems in civ3 are editable in the editor. It has been said again and again. You can't edit stacks. You can't edit planes being able to sink ships. You can't edit wonder movies. You can't edit scenarios. You can't edit multiplayer. There are many things that people don't like about the game that can't be edited. For some these are deal breakers. I for one was very disappointed when I learned civ3 wasn't multiplayer.

[rah]

Cap, I don't know about that.
Most of the problems I have that are game related, are there so the AI doesn't fall behind. So since we never include AIs in our MP games, a lot of the problems disappear without a single mod.

Vastly different starting positions and way too much information are the only real problems that I see. And having more menus for setting up game parameters. (and of course being able to move stacks)

Yes I hate the corruption, and not thrilled with the combat model, and the tech progression. But in MP, it will be even. And maybe more so, since a tech lead won't automatically confer victory on the battlefield.

I kinda like the resource model and see it as encouraging more conflict in MP. They will have to be guarded as much, if not more than your cities.

Due to the cost of maintianing armies and not having the AI around for padding your treasury, many decisions will have to be made. You probably will not be able to field a vastly superior attack force (in numbers) and leave adaquate forces behind for defense for any long period of time. Should make for some fun. You can't just stick three vet muskets fortified in that mountain city and expect the city to be invulnerable to attack. I mean heck, You build in a forest in III and it clears the forest for you. The only good defensive city terrain is hills, and sometimes rivers if the attacker is an idiot.

I just hope that they don't take so long to produce MP that most of the current MP community has drifted away to other games or activities.

RAH

[number6]

All I have to say to people who say "just change the rules to your liking and enjoy the game" is : I did not have to alter Civ 2 to enjoy the game. I expect the same with the sequel. The only changes I would even contemplate in making would be accessible from the game start up settings screens, not some kludgy stand alone editor. I am sorry, but I am disappointed in the game and none of the arguments made so far have changed my mind. I understand the simplicity of the editor it's just the principle of the thing. I don't want to play a non-standard version of the game to enjoy it. I am glad that many people on this forum can enjoy the game as is. I can't.

[Deornwulf]

Re: Re: Re: Confused about people quiting Civ3

Originally posted by dainbramaged13


wtf?
what bugs?
what crashes?
i havent had one yet and im running one of the worst machines of anyone on the site!

your wrong about that tho.
90% of complaints ive heard are fixable in the editor.
amen brakner

bugs (Some are pre-patch, others are post)
1. Air Superiority
2. Diplomacy screens - lines disappearing
3. Sound card issues - units making no sounds during combat
4. AI tech trading during human turn
5. Unsinkable AI galleys (bug or possible computer cheat)
6. Editor changes causing weird reactions (why include an editor to make changes that cause the game to react in unpredictable ways?)

You can check the bugs thread to find more examples.

As far as crashes, your machine only represents less than .001& of the current users so using it as the standard for crashes is inaccurate. An individual could take issue for not being able to play the game out of the box on a machine that meets the minimum requirements without downloading special patches to make their hardware compatible with the game.

Just for the record, I still have my Civ3 and still play it, inspite of my unique ability to crash it and cause other strangeness to happen. I was just trying to explain why others were complaining. Also, I have the worst machine - An HP Pavillion, 433 Celeron with the original sound and video cards.

Remember that everyone is allowed to have an opinion and that is the basis of consumer satisfaction. To take issue and argue with the consumer is pointless and bad business.

[Brakner]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Confused about people quiting Civ3

Originally posted by Deornwulf


>bugs (Some are pre-patch, others are post)
>1. Air Superiority
>2. Diplomacy screens - lines disappearing
>3. Sound card issues - units making no sounds during combat
>4. AI tech trading during human turn
>5. Unsinkable AI galleys (bug or possible computer cheat)
>6. Editor changes causing weird reactions (why include an editor >to make changes that cause the game to react in unpredictable >ways?)

This is what i dont understand. I play this gam to death and have never experienced any of these. Have you tried deleting and reinstalling then applying the patch fresh? You would figure i would have at least one of the problems you listed.

[Libertarian]

Every single thing that people have posted about in this forum can be changed to the users likeing.

Demonstrably false.

Show me how, using the editor, to move a nine-worker mountain brigade without clicking and scrolling nine times (or more).

Show me how, using the editor, to keep focus on units that are waging battle in close proximity to one another rather than being yanked to an irrelevant transport on the other side of the world.

Show me how, using the editor, to quiet that damn Domestic Nag, whose modal window I have to click more than a hundred times every five turns or so.

Show me how, using the editor, to stop one air recon from wiping out part of another one.

Show me how, using the editor, to make the Civilopedia available to me during diplomatic negotiations.

Show me how, using the editor, to hyperlink the build choices in my city screen.

Show me how, using the editor, to force other civs to honor my borders or else declare war — just as is required of me.

Show me how, using the editor, to slow down the eye-dust that flashes subliminally, "informing" me of pollution and growth here, there, and yonder somewhere.

Take your time. I'll wait.

[Ralf]

Originally posted by rah
I do view most moding as cheating anyway. I want legal cheats.....I mean strategies.

Theres a principal difference between the cheat-menus in Civ-2 & SMAC, and the CivMod editor in Civ-3 (or the Rules.txt file in Civ-2/SMAC, for that matter).

With that cheat-menu you could give yourself free advantages at any time, and take away some from the AI-civs. NOT so with that CivMod editor. Almost all changes are applied universially and equally to all Civs (except for those Civ-specific ones, of course).

Part of (and a big part) of playing SP games (SINCE NO MP) is comparing strategies and performance. For comparisons that mean anything, everyone has to be playing the same rules/settings. What fun is it to brag how well I did in a certain game if I had to mod the rules to attain it.

A: If you used that cheat-menu in Civ-2/SMAC, you where automatically ported from the "Hall of Fame". In Civ-3, they could have a "Altered game-rules: this, this & this..." warning-message.

B: In MP-games, as I have understand it, the software automatically extract the rules used by the MP-master (dont know the exact term here - I mean the guy how initiated that MP-game) and applies them to everybody - overruling any personal editor-preferences.