Jeffrey Morris: Dan Magaha said to ask you these two questions

[maxpublic]

Re: Re: ozzy for president

Originally posted by Ozymandous


lol, amusing.

Are you always so quick to label and attack everyone who doesn't agree with you? Or are you naturally rude and arrogant as to think you're the center of the world and saw no problem with the TONE of Libertarian's posts?

Strawman *and* misdirection. Really, I'd think it cunning if you weren't so obviously clueless.

I assume you hate the game and want everything now as well, with little to no real world experience beyond your own "instant gratification" impulses?

Strawman again. Your posts alone could keep the strawman industry pumped up for years to come.

I enjoy the 80% or so of the game I own. I'd just like Firaxis to finish the other 20% and post it as a patch, as I've already paid for the finished product.

But whether they do or not, in the end you're still a scum-sucker. You've proven that time and again with your posts.

Max

[Kolyana]

If they can't code this, then they need to go program databases or something.

Hm. So a career as an Oracle DBA or Programmer is a piece of cake?

Maybe Programming in FoxPro is actually a walk in the park?

Cool, because both jobs pay very well, if it's that easy I'll take it up in my spare time. Thanks Lib for the tip off.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by Kolyana


Hm. So a career as an Oracle DBA or Programmer is a piece of cake?

Maybe Programming in FoxPro is actually a walk in the park?

Cool, because both jobs pay very well, if it's that easy I'll take it up in my spare time. Thanks Lib for the tip off.

Oh you're cool. We're you just brain farting, or did you actually have a good point to make here? Preferably a productive one?

Charles.

[Barchan]

Originally posted by Ozymandous

:::too many quotes to fully reproduce:::

Why would I leave that word out when it WAS included in his response, probably for that exact reason. You can try to spin it anyway you want but until the word CONCRETE is OFFICIALLY removed the statement still stands how HE said it, not how YOU want it to read.

Whatever, dude. I'm not even going to go through the tedium of parsing your "argument" to deal with it. Suffice it to say that for someone who insists that I have to read an entire statement, unabridged, to get its overall true meaning (Eek! Don’t read between the lines, you’ll pervert the message being force-fed to you!), you sure are eager to pick everyone else's apart to turn them toward your own personal agenda. Your naïveté, though, is stunning; I hope you genuinely enjoy getting tipped over and pronged by every government official, corporate mouthpiece and plain-old-snake-oil-salesman that speaks to you.

[Libertarian]

Database programming, with the possible exception of BTrieve, is almost trivial since nearly all the complexity is encapsulated in the DB engine itself. It's just a matter of familiarity with syntax. It's not just a walk in the park, it's a ride through the park in a Rolls Royce.

But it pays more than games programming because it is more mission critical to more businesses.

[Akka]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Yep, that says a lot about you.

Ok, Ozy. You're still having either trouble to understand things, either are not really honest in your attempt to understand, but you were flamed and did not flamed in response. It's perhaps just out of pride, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and see if there is something worth in all of this.

Originally posted by Ozymandous
Hmm, so your sole argument here is that "all games have evolved and will evolve so therefore, ALL games should be better now than they were 5 years ago". Is this correct? I just want to make sure this is what you're saying before I give examples of games published a week, month or 6 months ago that PALE in comparison to games published 5+ years ago.

No this is not correct at all. I said that game evolve, and so games now SHOULD be better than games published 5 years ago. The difference is in SHOULD : they SHOULD be better, but ARE not always better. But as they SHOULD be better, I'll be much less forgiving on the flaws that actual games are, providing these flaws are below the actual criteria.
Graphics are the best example here, as NOBODY will accept 320x200 graphics anymore whatever the game, though they didn't mind ten years ago.

Hmm, question for you. Have you played Red Alert 2 by Westwood? If so you'll notice that the units cannot move in formations, nor can you have the production buildings queue up additional units, also you cannot have more than one building produce units of that type at a time. In other words you can't produce troops from more than one barracks even if you have more than one.

Ok, now then, have you played Age of Kings? If so you'll notice you CAN move in formation, you CAN build multiple units from multiple buildings at once.

Now then, both of these games are in the RTS genre. Since Red Alert 2 came out AFTER Age of Kings then by your logic it should have everything that Age of Kings had, correct? This despite the fact that the games had different people designing them and writing the code.

See the difference? Just because the people at one game company include a feature in their game doesn't mean that ALL games of that type will have that same feature.

You just prove my point. Red Alert 2 is actually one of the worst pile of **** that I ever seen on the RTS field, precisely because it did not include any of the evolution of RTS during the time. Just seeing how good it is selling prove that the average buyer doesn't really know what he's buying. Ah well, after all Survivor was a best-seller also. I should be used to the bad taste of people...

Dune 2 had no instant click order (you had to click "M" then left-click on the map for the unit to move, click "A" then on the ennemy unit for the unit to attack), no group move (only one unit at the time, and no other options). Can you sincerely tell me that you would accept this interface for any actual RTS ? Can you sincerely tell that if a RTS was so castrated in its interface it would not be purely inacceptable ?
Though, Dune 2 was the very best AT THIS TIME.

Should stacked movement be added, or should it have been in the game from the start? I would think YES, it should have been there or at least added, but that DOESN'T mean it should be automatically just because another company did this feature in their game.

Still following along? Good.

Still following, AND disagreeing. An evolution in interface and gameplay should always be considered. If not included, then it should be for good reasons. NO good reasons exists for no stacked movement. So it SHOULD be here.

Hmm, another bad analogy. Your original complaint, which I responded to, is this:

"it's easy to program all these things in, they should have done it"

To which I replied that unless you have actually written code for a commercial product you really DON'T know how hard or easy it is to program this stuff into the game.

Understand a little better now? Good.

Now, it was a good analogy. I don't have built a car engine neither, and I still can tell when an engine is amazingly powerful and when an engine is weak, just by comparing them to others. I know that a Viper engine is more powerful, and faster than a Ford Escort one, and still I don't have to understand how it works precisely. Just have to look at the concurrence.
And then, looking at the concurrence, I can say that stacked movement is doable and seems not that hard to do.


Okay, now do you understand better ?

[ratbert9]

Very interesting thread, this is turning out to be better then a catfight at a red neck bar on a Saturday night. But getting back to serious a point, why don’t you settle this issue like real men, here is my proposal.

The following proposal is predicated on the following conditions:
- We get a MP patch/upgrade.
- The major bugs, not fixed with the latest patch 1.16f, get fixed.
- Everyone who wants to participate accepts a neutral moderator,, and the moderator sets initial conditions and resolves disputes.

Proposal: A MP game involving the major combatants from this thread. Updates will be provided, and the only insults/flames allowed will be in regards to one's ability to play Civ III. Someone could even contact the people from Fireaxis and see if they would like to participate (Just think of the following negotiation, "What do you need for gems?", "The ability to move a stack of units with one keystroke, released in the next patch").

[Colonel Kraken]

Re: Jeffrey Morris: Dan Magaha said to ask you these two questions

Originally posted by Libertarian
Dan Magaha said to ask you. Okay, so we're asking.

-----

This single oversight has turned Sid's famous "just one more turn" into "oh lord, not another turn".

(Yes, I know that you're supposed to be able to right-click and activate a group of units, BUT IT DOESN'T WORK. Mkay? A couple of them might activate as expected, but then it's right back to the random herky-jerky all over the map.)

Maybe you already know this, I don't know, but try this: Right-click on your stack of units to get the list of units. Hold down the [SHIFT] key and left-click the units you want to activate. Exit the menu.

It has been my experience that you'll be able to move all the units in that stack, in turn, before the program takes you to a different unit to move. Just my experience. Maybe I've been lucky.

[zoyd]

Libertarian logic

Lib,

You're probably ticked at me for calling a statement of yours 'stupid' on another thread, but you're aces on this one.

Both suggestions are good ones, and your defense of your tone has been exemplary.

I often wonder how Civ3 would end up given two possible worlds -- one in which the realists whine and gripe and ask/demand patches and fixes, and another which is just full of the brown-nosed sycophantry so often espoused here.

Bottom line: the whiners are trying to make Firaxis make a better product -- and they'd get it. The moaning (and honestly good suggestions) would end up with Civ 3 version 1.94f or something.

The sycophants would lap up every oversight as a 'feature' and end up with Civ3 version 1.10, because there would be no demand for a polished product.

And which version would anyone rather play?



(wondering out loud)... If Wonder movies are so tough to produce, why not at least include the old ones, you know? So, like, we don't feel as though we're getting LESS product than we did w/Civ2?

[Libertarian]

Re: Re: Jeffrey Morris: Dan Magaha said to ask you these two questions

Originally posted by Colonel Kraken





Maybe you already know this, I don't know, but try this: Right-click on your stack of units to get the list of units. Hold down the [SHIFT] key and left-click the units you want to activate. Exit the menu.

It has been my experience that you'll be able to move all the units in that stack, in turn, before the program takes you to a different unit to move. Just my experience. Maybe I've been lucky.

You've been lucky. As per what you quoted from me, it doesn't always work as expected. (In fact, it usually doesn't.) But thanks for trying to help. That's certainly more than Jeff has done.

[gachnar]

Re: Libertarian logic

Originally posted by zoyd
I often wonder how Civ3 would end up given two possible worlds -- one in which the realists whine and gripe and ask/demand patches and fixes, and another which is just full of the brown-nosed sycophantry so often espoused here.

Bottom line: the whiners are trying to make Firaxis make a better product -- and they'd get it. The moaning (and honestly good suggestions) would end up with Civ 3 version 1.94f or something.

The sycophants would lap up every oversight as a 'feature' and end up with Civ3 version 1.10, because there would be no demand for a polished product.

So.

Which camp do I fall into? Everyone has been calling me a "fanboy" simply because I try to get people to show some respect toward Firaxis. I guess the only way to help Firaxis is to call them incompetant, stupid, ignorant, etc. Yeah... That usually works real well.

Mechanic: So... Just an oil change and check the filters?
Whiner: Yes, you idiot. And could you check the alternator belt too, you incompetant loser.

I'm sure thats the best way to get good help.

No one thinks these are bad ideas. I disagree with how they are posted. Apparently Yin ("The Lord of all that is Good and Light") posted a list of things to fix in SMACX. I wonder. Did he use a condescending tone like Lib does constantly? Does he outright insult them like Desert Dog, one of my personal favorites of the Whiner crowd? I really dont know. I cant remember reading it.

I've posted the things that I would like fixed. I'm pretty sure somebody from Firaxis read them. I'm sure that calling them the devil-spawn of Maryland won't make them act on it more.

Why do people think that yelling and making people angry will get things done better? Its so childish. When you get any social skills you realize its much easier to get people to do things if you make them think that they want to do it. Give Firaxis ideas. Give them ideas of how to implement it. Let them know that you will be thankful when its implemented.

I'm also going to ignore the fact that Firaxis knew about grouped movement 2 days after the US release. Soren acknowledged it. This is nothing new. But Libertarian decided to make a big deal of it, and has now manufactured a reason to complain to Firaxis. This would be no different than Alexanders Horse jumping in and complaining about Firaxis not including MP in the patch.

(wondering out loud)... If Wonder movies are so tough to produce, why not at least include the old ones, you know? So, like, we don't feel as though we're getting LESS product than we did w/Civ2?

Oh. See. This is what annoys me about gamers.

Take your pick:

1) Wonder Movies
2) More Zoom Levels
3) Pseudo-Intelligent Unit selection
4) Group Movement
5) Editor Improvements
6) Multiplayer Support

You really want them to spend their time on trying to get useless Wonder movies to play? Or do you think that the code is already there, they just decided the movies would be only 1 frame?

I would rather they spend their time actually improving the game.

[Trifna]

Just wanted to say I am ENTIRELY supporting these two aspects. I know Firaxis knows them too... just hope they're not pushing it later and later just for the bang for the buck (something like that).

[Trifna]

I often wonder how Civ3 would end up given two possible worlds -- one in which the realists whine and gripe and ask/demand patches and fixes, and another which is just full of the brown-nosed sycophantry so often espoused here.

A whiner isn't someone that criticize and try to find ways to make things better than they are. A whiner is the one that says something is bad without generally even saying why and giving solution, or just repeating what was already said over and over. Total waste of time.

[Libertarian]

Did he use a condescending tone like Lib does constantly?

We believe that it has erred in its assessment of our tone.