Dan Magaha explains Firaxis position on late-game tedium

[techumseh]

Re: Re: Firaxis' Apathy

Originally posted by Adam Wallock


I have played many hours of game time and although I admit that stacked movement would be nice, IMO it is hardly a game breaker. The notion that we, the retail customers are merely beta-testers is preposterous. I have gotten my $50 worth and clearly so have many others.



Firaxis does not owe us anything. It's great that they are continuing to put work into the game and obviously if they want to sell games in the future its in their best interest to support this one. I agree that the LE was a sham, blame Infogrames it was clearly their decision. Firaxis has NO OBLIGATION to provide verbose progress reports on every thought and action that they are taking to improve their product. It is this very sense of entitlement that is so childish. As others here have said, It sure is too bad that this game can't be exactly the way that you would want it. Amazing that so many others are satisfied. Hmm...

Ya think, settler boy? Owe us nothing you say? Sorry, for 50 bucks they owe us some value for money. While some here think they got it, many more don't. Sales are sagging, the market is speaking. NO OBLIGATION to respond you say? It was Firaxis that came on these very forums months ago to promote their product, spreading the word about how they wanted to consult the fans and how they'd produce a first rate product worthy of the name. Now all they will say is "When we have something concrete to say about (insert subject here) then we will make an announcement." Don't you remember? Or were you just not around back then?

Come now. We alienate ourselves. Firaxis is hardly responsible for the egocentric attitudes of their customers.

Yeah right!

If this minor PR/Customer Service issue is making your days unhappy, you should have a serious look at your priorities. This is the whole problem. People are taking this game way too seriously and its clogging up an otherwise interesting and productive forum.

Sorry, but I just don't buy it.

If unhappy Civ fans are making your days unhappy, you should take a serious look at your priorities. This is the whole problem. People are taking these forums way too seriously and it's clogging up an otherwise interesting and productive forum.

Sorry, but I never should have bought it.

[Moraelin]

Re: Re: Firaxis' Apathy

Originally posted by Adam Wallock
I have played many hours of game time and although I admit that stacked movement would be nice, IMO it is hardly a game breaker.

Good grief. Ever tried using artillery in offense? Or better yet, catapults, before you have railroads? If you just click and send it that-a-way all across the continent, some four out of five units will get captured before even reaching the target. Effectively, you've been building catapults for the AI. The ONLY way to use them is to stack them together with some deffensive units, then move the whole group one by one, one freakin' square at a time, all over a 100 square march.

Heck, it doesn't even have to be catapults. Try using Longbowmen in offense. (Not that it's even possible to use a 4/1/1 unit for anything but offense.) The very first game that I've played, and just sent them that-a-way, over half of them got killed by AI counter-attacks before inflicting any damage to the city's defenders. Heck, even cheap Spearmen counter-attacking have a 50-50 chance of killing Longbowmen.

Now if you're playing on Chieftain -- as was the case with my first game -- sure, you can always out-manufacture the AI. He may be killing half my Longbowmen, but, hey, I can make four times as many as he's making Legionaries anyway. Who cares?

Try playing on some higher difficulty level, though, where the AI starts only paying half the cost you do when making a unit. THEN tell me if you just shrug off losing units to the lack of stack movement. When every unit counts, you're back to square one: moving those units together yourself, one square at a time. Is that great fun, or what?

Come now. We alienate ourselves. Firaxis is hardly responsible for the egocentric attitudes of their customers.

Umm... Sorry to break your phantasies, but the customer IS supposed to be egocentric. I paid some money there to Infogrames and Firaxis, not the other way around.

I don't know how'd the idea that software customers have to be BDSM submissives who'll gladly take any punishment or humiliation. Who'll accept that any crap is their problem, and likely their fault. But it's all wrong. At the end of the day, it's a sale like any other. If I bought a watch or a TV or something as cheap as a pen, and it's a pain in the rear to use and doesn't work as advertised either, I'd go get my money back. Noone would say that a TV without a remote control, and with only next/prev channel buttons, so you have to flip through some tens of channels slowly one by one -- which is a pretty good equivalent of the Civ 3 tedium -- is anything but bad design. NOT that hey, it's hardly a show stopper, and the customer should darn well learn to live with it. In the software industry, what, I'm not allowed even to say I'm disappointed? Jesus.

[Libertarian]

Now that you have their response will you simply wait quietly?

I won't hound them for an answer, if that's what you mean. At last, they have admitted that these two issues are responsible for making their game Not(Fun).

I've no idea what style of game you play. I can't conceive of a strategy where development of tile resources would not be a critical part of the game, except perhaps for a militaristic expand-and-raze blitz. Even then, though, you'd need some sort of supply base.

For me, a big part of what makes a game fun is whether you can fight for a strategic objective, and the only obstacles are responses from the game, like AI decisions, unlucky resourse allocations, failed battle, that sort of thing. What you should NOT have to fight is the very mechanics by which you tactically achieve your strategy.

For me, it's very difficult to carry a train of thought when I have to keep CORRECTING where the game has taken me. The theater of battle is ruined by the incessant and senseless interruptions of units whose activation sequences are frankly bizarre.

Firaxis admitted two things, finally. One, that these issues are problems and two, that they never played the late game. They had time only to play the early game for testing. That's likely why the air superiority bug slipped in.

Maybe you're a new player. Once you have the game firmly under your belt and discover that massive worker and military units are necessary to a successful growth strategy, you might find that what you are anticipating is no longer a strategic objective but a tedious, dull, and repetitious click-scroll-repeat sequence.

There's no game at all in that part of the game.

[Libertarian]

Yes, Lib's posts on the matter have become repetitive, but that is only because Firaxis' replies are continually dismissive and uninformative.

Honestly, I almost felt like they were telling me to put the lotion in the basket:

"We have heard its complaint, and now it shall takes its leave of us."

[Evil_Eric_4]

My first (and only) thread that could be considered "whining" dealt on precisely these two late game killers.
For the longest time I resisted posting in the whine threads mainly because all the issues I had with the game were IMO minor-or editable.
I was still having fun so what the hell.
Now that Ive gotten to the late modern ages on MONARCH LEVEL
(which has been the most challenging and balanced level for me)
Everything I do is important now --All this clicking and getting bounced around the map just breeds mistakes that sometimes can be hard to overcome and are always frustrating.

Civ III is a good game with many shortcomings, and many of these shortcomings only become evident after playing the game for a while. Lack of stacked movement is one of these. To tell you the truth, I got bored with the end games in Civ III myself but couldn't put a finger on why it was until the issue was brought up on these boards. Firaxis is pretty lucky to get such dedicated unpaid play testers.

Agreed

They will get things done faster if people like you would stop harping on them. I find your relentlessness on this subject more childish than a good deal of the rant type postings on 'Poly.

whatever

Try playing on some higher difficulty level, though, where the AI starts only paying half the cost you do when making a unit. THEN tell me if you just shrug off losing units to the lack of stack movement. When every unit counts, you're back to square one: moving those units together yourself, one square at a time. Is that great fun, or what?

couldnt have put it better myself

Threads like these are the definition of tedium.

Who is this guy?

[Libertarian]

And by the way, if Firaxis can live with their game being Not(Fun), that's fine by me. All that ever bothered me was the seeming pretense that nothing was wrong.

After trying to play the game a different way, and still finding it boring as hell, and knowing that this is how Firaxis intends it to be, I can now make my own decision with respect to whether I'll play it again. I might make some editor changes and see whether I can render the workers less important.

Barring that, I'm pretty well done with it.

[techumseh]

Originally posted by Libertarian


Firaxis admitted two things, finally. One, that these issues are problems and two, that they never played the late game. They had time only to play the early game for testing. That's likely why the air superiority bug slipped in.

Pardon me, Libertarian, as I don't comb these forums in great detail. Did Firaxis really say that they never played the late game? If so, it's the most appalling admission I've ever heard from a game company. To admit, after all the pre-game hype by Firaxis on these forums about producing the best possible product, that they never even finished playtesting the game beggars belief. Can you point me to the location of these comments? Thank you.

[Libertarian]

It was in the chat.

The interface didn't allow for copying, so I can't give you the exact quote. But to paraphrase, they explained in some detail that there was little or no testing in the modern era due to time constraints, saying that it can take considerable time to get out of the early eras — time they presumably didn't have.

The answer, while not the answer I'd hoped for, is at least an answer that makes some sense. That's why I've accepted it. I much more appreciate honesty and candor than I do a coy and foolish denial.

They know that their game is tedious and no fun. Somehow, that satisfies me.

[bahoo]

Originally posted by techumseh


Pardon me, Libertarian, as I don't comb these forums in great detail. Did Firaxis really say that they never played the late game? If so, it's the most appalling admission I've ever heard from a game company. To admit, after all the pre-game hype by Firaxis on these forums about producing the best possible product, that they never even finished playtesting the game beggars belief. Can you point me to the location of these comments? Thank you.

Whether or not they said it, it's clearly quite obvious. If it wasn't the case there wouldn't be such a glut of late game problems. The majority of players probably encountered the Air Superiority bug their FIRST game. One damn beta tester could've caught taht! Not to mention the late game tedium, slow time between turns on larger sized maps, and completely uselessness of many modern units such as the helicopter and cruise missile.

Pardon me, but I think I have the right to be pretty damn pissed for buying a game that takes a month to get patched into working condition just because they wanted to get it out before friggin Christmas.

I haven't given up on Firaxis yet, I'll be very interested to see how well they support the game after the sales dry up and the money stops coming in. But from the seemingly restrained responses we're getting about some poignant issues, I don't look for too much in the near future.

Hopefully they prove me wrong.

[Kolyana]

This is possibly one of the more interesting threads regarding this subject, if not for the obvious intellect and oratory capability of the participants. It has yet to collapse into a morass of name calling, and for that I applaud you all.

For my part, the answer has been amazingly simple: I stopped playing Civ3 several days ago. This wasn't a pre-determined decision, it wasn't anything I did out of spite or childish behavior ... I simply moved on.

Did I get my monies worth? Well, if we equate hours to dollars, perhaps. Did it have the longevity of many other games I have bought in the past? No.

Not sure what to play now, I just know that Civ3 now bores me and the editor does not allow the level of customization Firaxis lead us to believe.

Ho-hum.

[Ming]

Originally posted by Libertarian
All that ever bothered me was the seeming pretense that nothing was wrong.

What BS... That was your interpretation, not reality. Find me anywhere where they claim that the game is perfect. They even started threads to discuss what people felt were still wrong.
Your whole crusade is based on an answer they gave to you (which came within 5 hours of you posting the question) in regards to stacked movement. Their response was worded in a way that you interpreted as insulting. They basically said they would provide an answer when they had something to say. Which is pretty much no different then saying (asa they did later after you continued your crusade) we know there is a problem, but we don't know what can be done about it. Your whole point that thier first comment implys that they were blowing you off and not admitting to the problem is just crap. If you think they weren't aware of the problem, you are the ignorant one.

After trying to play the game a different way, and still finding it boring as hell, and knowing that this is how Firaxis intends it to be

Yeah... It was their intent to create a boring game...
More bad assumptions on your part. I can't argue that the points you raise do make it boring late (and early and middle) in the game. But your assumption that they did it on purpose to make it a boring game is just more BS.


I'm the first to admit there are serious problems with the game.
And I really hope that many of them can be fixed.
But so many of your posts make claims like they don't give a crap, or intented to make the game boring, or don't give a hoot about their customers is crap and just ignorant on your part.

If they really didn't give a damn... it would have gone the route of CTP II, where a company just turned their back on the game really quickly. That is not the case here. Yeah, they should have play tested the game more... yeah... the game was released too early... That is the nature of the software business. I don't like it, and I think it's a crappy way to do business, but it seems like most software companies do the same thing.

So I have no problem with your posts that point out the many errors of the game... keep up the good work. I will also do the same... I"m just not going to make bad assumptions that they don't give a damn, and that they are insulting to the community.

[John-SJ]

Re: Re: Firaxis' Apathy

Originally posted by Adam Wallock
I have played many hours of game time and although I admit that stacked movement would be nice, IMO it is hardly a game breaker. The notion that we, the retail customers are merely beta-testers is preposterous. I have gotten my $50 worth and clearly so have many others.

I'm glad that you got your $50 worth, but clearly, many others have not. Are you saying that since you got your money's worth that the rest of us should keep quiet? Isn't that a bit egotistical?

Firaxis does not owe us anything. It's great that they are continuing to put work into the game and obviously if they want to sell games in the future its in their best interest to support this one.

Yes, it is best that they support this one. I speak only for myself here, but up until now when Firaxis released a game I bought it the first day it was available, no questions asked. That's clearly what Firaxis was counting on for a lot of sales with Civ3, but I think Civ3 will be the LAST game where people will automatically assume (as I did) that the Sid Meier name means anything. From now on I will wait, and not just for the online reviews, obviously those can't be relied on any more either, I'll wait for the opinions of the suck... I mean players who buy the game first before making my decision.

.... Firaxis has NO OBLIGATION to provide verbose progress reports on every thought and action that they are taking to improve their product. ...

You're right, I agree with you there, Firaxis is under no OBLIGATION whatsoever. However, I have found that people tend to deal more with companies that treat them properly and with respect rather than those that assume that since they already have their money they are the ones in the position of power rather than the customer. If Firaxis as a company never intended to produce another game they would be right, but I have a feeling that Firaxis would like to keep it's customer base so that they can sell other games in the future. It is for that reason that I find Firaxis' attitude so mystifying.

John-SJ

[John-SJ]

Originally posted by Ming
Yeah... It was their intent to create a boring game...
More bad assumptions on your part. I can't argue that the points you raise do make it boring late (and early and middle) in the game. But your assumption that they did it on purpose to make it a boring game is just more BS.

Ming, I think you miss the point. Firaxis did not intend for the game to be boring, but it turned out that the design that the did produce (the design they intended) is boring. Too bad nobody played it enough to figure that out. I played for less than 10 hours and haven't been back since. The reason? BOREDOM! In the extreme!

John-SJ

[Ming]

No... I don't miss the point.
I have to agree that their design leads to boring play.

My problem is with his implication that that it was their intent to design a boring game. I find that to be total BS... The fact that can be boring is a design flaw, not an intent

[Grumbold]

Interesting that they should finally acknowledge that they did not have time to test the modern age. It was something I was saying on the forums quite a lot pre-release, pointing to the lack of screenshots showing railroads or modern units, and I took a fair bit of flak for being pessimistic. Nice to see my deductions weren't far from the truth (but not as nice as getting a fully tested game of course).

I would have thought that there was one very simple solution to the jumping of focus - add new sorting hotkeys. The first would reorder units by type in a default formation of bombers, artillery, ships, fighters, tanks, cavalry, infantry, workers, settlers or allowing you to customise that order. Secondly, a hotkey that would reorder units based on their current stack. So all units currently stacked together will subsequently move one after the other. Neither is perfect but they are both better than the current order of construction/capture rota.

Moving stacks in one go is more complicated so I can accept we may not be seeing that appear unless it can fit into the multiplayer/expansion pack.