Dan Magaha explains Firaxis position on late-game tedium

[Libertarian]

Incidentally, I challenge you to produce testimony from the 20% who will hate group movement and proximate unit activation sequencing.

[Steve Clark]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Firaxis' Apathy

Originally posted by hexagonian
Hear, hear, and I am so glad for the so-called 'whiners' and their view on this game, because they offer a perspective that will never come from the developers.

hex, I disagree. Take a look at this thread...

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=38347

This will go a long ways in our desires to make the game more playable and enjoyable. And you don't see any whining in it (at least something really blatant).

Incidentally, I challenge you to produce testimony from the 20% who will hate group movement and proximate unit activation sequencing.

The 20% of those that raved about and enjoyed playing Nemo's SF and RF.

Lib, we are on the same page, I guess it does come down to temperament and style. You and I know that many of the desires and fixes will be in the expansion pack that we'll pay $29.99 for. For 20%, that'll be fine (like me); 20% will scream that they shouldn't have to pay for that; and 60% won't care one way or the other. You'll see. Personally, I fully expect to buy the expansion pack in order for me to finally get the scenarios so I can play the game again. But others have a difference of opinion on that and that's fine. No decision will be acceptable to all parties involved, esp. since it probably will come down to having to buy the expansion pack for the scenarios and fixes, or not having them at all.

[CapTVK]

Steve Clark,


My experience with Civ3 is quite limited to a few hours of playtesting but if what you say is true. That the "late game tedium is comparable to the massive unit movements in Nemo's RF and SF". Because if that is true Firaxis has made a terrible TERRIBLE MISCALCULATION ABOUT THE WAY CIV IS PLAYED!

RF and SF are excellent scenarios they surpass their commercial counterparts in every aspect. But they were only meant for the true fans, the grognards, the people who love strategy. I love those scenarios although it can be tedious to plan, shift and move hundreds of units around. And if a diehard civfan feels that way...How would a newcomer to Civ3 feel? Control hundreds of units all over the map, doing what?

In a scenario like SF and RF there is a goal to strive for. But in a regular game? Conquer the world? UN or Cultural victory? Okay, but you have to shuffle hundreds of units time and time again. After two or three I can imagine that people get bored of Civ3 and forget about it.


Not good

[Steve Clark]

Cap, I would agree that's an accurate assessment. Civ always has been about units, the common thread that connects 6000 years of history. Historically, there are more real-life units on this earth than in the past. So what do you do? Eliminate the Modern Age from the game altogether? Or if you abstract it even more, wouldn't you lose the critical control you would need at the beginning? Even with better control of modern units, you can't get away from the sheer numbers (just like in Civ2). So what's really the solution?

For me, that's why I have been keying on scenarios for the 2 years I have been here. If I want to play grognard in the modern age, I'll load up a WW2 scenario. If I just want to fight with 7 different kinds of war chariots, I'll play an ancient age scenario. When I said many times that if you want the [insert your favorite] age to last longer, go play a scenario and don't mess with the regular game. Instead what they did was to take four full scenarios and merged them together into the Civ3 regular game. That was not the right design choice, imo. Instead, they should have made the regular game not too short but not too long, and concentrate more on designing, testing and releasing as many scenarios as possible (as well as the full ability to create new ones). Oh well.

[Libertarian]

A couple weeks ago, I was delighted to discover my wife playing a game of Civ3. I looked over her shoulder and saw fortified units (including workers) all over the place. "Why," I asked, "aren't you using those units?"

"I don't know what to do with them," she replied, "and they're too much trouble to mess with."

Out of the mouths of newbies...

[Lemmy]

"I don't know what to do with them," she replied, "and they're too much trouble to mess with."

i think that's why they put the "automate" button there...

about the features not in the game:
You're absolutely right that they are not in the game now, but they haven't dropped any them for good, at least not officially. They certainly screwed up by releasing the game unfinished, but while they are still working on it, i won't say they exaggerated the product. IMO you can't pass judgement over an unfinished product.

hmm, i really must be one of the optimists here judging by this post..

[Libertarian]

i think that's why they put the "automate" button there...

Sadly, you're probably right. That probably IS why they put that button there. It would be like airlines providing oxygen masks for the reason that they intend to supply no air to the passenger compartments.

They certainly screwed up by releasing the game unfinished, but while they are still working on it, i won't say they exaggerated the product.

Then kindly reconcile the exaggerations that I enumerated in some detail on the previous page.

[Desert Dog]

reviews wrong!

Originally posted by Ming


You don't seem confused to me... That's exactly what happened.
Publishers needed quick reviews so that they could be first, and that's just what they all are... quick reviews. You really need to play the game for a long time to write a good review. I would have loved to have a read a review by Libertarian after he had played the game...

Plus, the online and magazines concerns are in bed with the publishers of games. That is where the bulk of their advertising revenues come from a bad system to say the least, but that's reality. Even when they are critical, they never go far enough. Add that to the poor quality of game testing, and it's no surprise why anybody with a half a brain won't buy a game based on those types of reviews

Gee even one of the moderators are coming across with the TRUTH about the OVER RATINGS of the "unfinished" Civ 3. I have played the game EXTENSIVELY and I rate the game a 6.5 at best! I am even doubting that Firaxis can afford or even cares about fixing the major issues. People who complain about the game are called whiners. This pisses me off big time, when I complain it is for a reason. If the game was a 9.0 I would not be complaining I would be playing and having fun.
The most SURPRISING thing is that the patch actually makes the game MUCH worse then if you did not install it. I personally keep getting crashes when trying to enter the industrial or modern ages.
Another surprising thing is how many people are sticking up for this "POOR" excuse of a sequel of civ 2. I am playing the game without the patch because I am a "Die Hard" addict of civ 2.
This should have been called Call To Power 3 CTP as most TRUE civ 2 lovers know is a rip off of the civ 2. The game had some good things in it, but fell short big time with game play. (Mainly the diplomacy problems which never were fixed!)

All I want is a patch to make this game more playable then it is. I have YET to finish one game. I keep having problems with every single one. I am playing game #51 right now. Hopefully it will not crash so I can see the end!
Firaxis is HIDING for some reason. They won't even address the problems pretending they are not there? I like the old Firaxis they admitted the problems and worked very hard to correct them. What do we get with the New Firaxis, statements like "We will not respond to customers expectations not being met!" What the hell kind of thing is that for a company to say. Expectations are a game that is playable without waiting "MONTHS" for a fix to play it! SMAC had many problems Tim Train came right out and said we are working on the patch as fast as we can. He kept in touch with the entire community. Does anyone remember this?

Desert Dog

[Libertarian]

Hopefully it will not crash so I can see the end!

Oh, you're in for a real treat: a message complete with exclamation point.

[Desert Dog]

The real treat is?

Originally posted by Libertarian


Oh, you're in for a real treat: a message complete with exclamation point.

The real treat is geek jerkoffs like you making comments about someone's posts. I am sorry my grammer does not fit your "approval" or whatever. Just one thing, who labeled you the person who approves or disapproves of everyone's posts? Should I go through you first before posting "LORD"?

PLEASE everyone that just trys to flame everyone, what is your point? Are you so "INSECURE" with yourself that you must spend all your time putting down others to rise above them?

I find you very pathetic and funny at the time, but in the end you just make me sick. You represent only yourself and a few other small individuals who seem to spent all their time trying to correct and discredit everyone's posts. You are making a complete ass out of yourself and this website in my opinion.
This place is for civ players to come and voice theirs views etc. This is NOT a place to control or try to otherwise be the KING of. If you do not like what I post skip it instead of wasting everyone's time with your rants.. Now you got me ranting and raving. Merry freaking Christmas I hope your ego is big enough!

Desert Dog

[Ming]

Desert Dog...
Lib wasn't commenting on your grammer or flaming you.

He was just commenting that when you win a game of Civ III, all you get is a simple message saying you won. No great victory movie.... just a boring simple one screen message.

He was saying that it isn't worth seeing the end of a game

[Libertarian]

Wow.

[Kolyana]

Desert Dog: HAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA.

Yes, it is hard to believe that is all your infor when you finally win a game, but Lib was *not* attacking your post.

Now I *really* hope that you get to finish a game, then it'll all make sense.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"You Won!"

[francoImpaler]

Last night I played CivII for the first time in a couple of years. I was looking for a perspective between II and III.

Guess what, CivII is magnitudes better. I know that's no revelation but everything about the game is higher quality except for the outdated graphics.

Here's a clue for the designers. I would rather pay more for a high quality game than be satisfied with crap designed to meet the $49 price point.

CivIII is retro to SMAC, What happened?

[Heliodorus]

Wow, all the way to page 3 before a true ad hominem attack (I hope Desert Dog's was a misunderstanding, as a couple others seem to think).

Now, in this whole debate about stacked movement/logical activation, I think the most important point being overlooked is this:

Firaxis chose to commit multiple "sins of omission," the analysis of which leaves me extremely disappointed, and contemplating whether I should be angry (which I will choose against, because life is too short to get angry about disappointment with a game).

The most egregious sin of omission is clearly that the production team did NOT PLAYTEST THOROUGHLY ENOUGH.

I don't care who's fault that was (and in fact it was everyone's fault in the production cycle because no one put a so-called foot down). I also don't care what the motive was for this omission (although it clearly smells of financial incentive/release date).

From that omission comes a host of other omissions which have ONLY widened the rift between the fan community and the production crew.

Specifically, the production crew repeatedly chose NOT to reveal that they made the playtesting compromise. Moreover, they continually chose not to reveal future plans for patches/improvements (possibly because they didn't want to reveal the playtesting compromise). So what you have is a production crew that compromised its integrity, and instead of redeeming its integrity in admitting this, it continued in the denial. Finally, they are still choosing not to fix the issues brought up by the community that hugely detract from gameplay enjoyment (maybe because they can't, now, who knows, really).

The result is a game that could easily have been MORE fun, and a fan base that is justifiably upset that an easily identifiable problem was never addressed. Moreover, the fan base is justifiably upset with its perception (and perception IS reality) that it was ignored in both pre- and post-release stages (oh, and if you're not disappointed that they didn't playtest more, you SHOULD be, because that was the biggest insult committed against everyone who bought Civ3).

Finally, now we have the opportunity to be outraged that Firaxis/Infogrames actually could have prevented this sequence if they had actually playtested more thorougly...

The omission of right action is almost always (and this is a personal belief) the moral equivalent to the comission of wrong action. In other words, in my view of things, the actions of Firaxis and Infogrames produced a sub-standard product, and they were comfortable with those actions - therefore, they were comfortable releasing a substandard product. They did not care about quality.

On the one hand, I hope it bites Firaxis and they learn a lesson from it in lowered future sales. On the other hand, I don't want to be vindictive - I want to get some fixes that make THIS game better NOW.

So, for the record, shame on Firaxis for poor QA standards. Look what you have wrought here!

Oh, and all of this means Libertarian was more right than he knew, doesn't it?