Should Firaxis now work on Patches or an XP???

[yin26]

Fact 1: Saying that I am talking out of my ass is an attack.

Fact 2: Saying that people with rather low standards are more likely to enjoy Civ3 and that Firaxis knowingly released an inferior product in order to meet deadlines is NOT an attack.

Fact 3: If you can't read properly, I'm glad to be on your ignore list. Saves me time.

Fact 4: You seem also to have rather low standards for computer games. Thus, Civ3 in its current state is a good fit for you. Enjoy it.

[Dida]

I agree with yin26. Civ3 in the state that it was released was nothing more than a beta. The patches fixed some problems but not all of them.
If they ever released a public beta, this game would be much better. But, maybe Firaxis know people will get disappointed and refuse to buy their game once they play the beta, so, they decided not to do that.

[TechWins]

I think Yin is talking out of his arse

Sorry but it is automatically implied that Yin is talking out of his ass, so there is no need to specify that. ....Just kidding.

[Arkalius]

You know what I find most annoying? People who seem to think that because they aren't satisfied with something, that it sucks. It's not like Firaxis or Sid Meier owes us anything. They've obviously worked very hard on this game. Criticizing the game is one thing, but to make the universal judgement that it is bad based on your own opinion of it is presumptuous at best. What's worse is criticizing people's tastes and standards because of it. It's rude and disrespectful.

I have very specific tastes when it comes to games. I'm not "easily pleased," but I do not presume to make judgements on the quality of the game based on whether or not I like it. If you don't like it, don't play it. You don't have to spend time here bringing everyone else down because of it. I'm not saying you don't have the right to complain, but you're not just complaining, your being rude and disrespectful.

Anyway, as far as XP patches go, what would be the purpose? Civ 3 runs fine in XP for me. On that note, what is wrong with everyone and XP... I've had nary a problem with it since I installed it and am very happy with it, yet just about everyone else I talk to has some kind of sorted tale about how XP has this or that problem...

Anyway, carry on

[Terser]

XP=Expansion pack.

Don't feel foolish. That's a misunderstanding I've seen on two other boards in the last four months.

[Gatekeeper]

Everyone:

It's my understanding that TPTB are focusing on the Civ III editor right now. Is that a mistaken belief?

CYBERAmazon

[yin26]

What's worse is criticizing people's tastes and standards because of it. It's rude and disrespectful.

Hey, if people here can say that I'll 'never be pleased blah blah blah,' I find it an even message to say: "Some of you here are TOO EASILY pleased." Missing/broken editor, missing MP, and a host of horridly-implemented or unexplained 'features' squarely puts Civ3 in the beta category.

To not admit that is to put yourself in the 'too easily pleased' category. If that bothers you, hang around. You're scheduled to get a whole lot more bothered before the year is out.

[Solver]

I don't know, frankly. If the XP adds nothing but multiplayer and the ability to create scenarios, I'm definitely not buying it. Except if I, miracly, get a good connection.

If XP has some SP additions, I will surely buy it.

[Worthingtons]

Ok Yin, perhaps saying that you were 'talking out of your arse' was a little strong, but I am quite annoyed that Firaxis release what was , IMO a good game with some great new ideas. It gets slaughtered for it's faults (which there were many of to start with), with it's patches it solves MANY of the things people were complaining about, but people still seem completely unsatisfied.

and back on topic, if Firaxis are working on an editor that is also a very good cause.

As for Easily pleased, I rarely purchase computer games because i am so uneasily pleased, many of those games which i have bought have lasted little over a few hours of Gameplay (CTP for an example). Perhaps i find Civ III a better product because i havent been 'spoilt' with SMAC and i didnt overplay Civ II... I dont know.

[aahz_capone]

To bring the conversation away from the easily pleasing thing and back to the xp (hell, I'm easily pleased with a beer in one hand and a chick in the other, ain't that hard) I can confidently say that patches always continue for games for well over a year, no matter what the follow up program of the company is, just look at SMAC or Starcraft. That said, if the XP includes more options on the diplmacy (ie. the ones they had in SMAC but left out here), a more usable UN like SMAC, and a more complex gov system with sub-parts like in SMAC, I WILL buy it. If not... well... what's the point?

Is it coincidence that I mention SMAC so much? Could it be that (gasp) it was more developed? You decide!!!

[Dom Pedro II]

Well, I think an expansion pack makes some sense... I mean, I'm not a game expert like some people, but it seems to me that the patches are only fixing minute details to the game. A lot of the MAJOR necessary changes haven't been addressed. Might not an expansion pack be able to address that?

Frankly, the only thing that I demand at this point is a proper Editor.... and with that Editor I ABSOLUTELY MUST have some sort of scripting language or another macro language for events. Even if I couldn't do a historical scenario, I would like to be able to put events in the regular game that can accomplish those things that I find the game as it is unable to provide. And I will only get that from an expansion pack.

[yin26]

Rothy: No worries. You know, some elements of the game are more important to some people than others. I understand that. I think that many of the 'big' improvements we hard to please guys want will be part of the x-pack ... and that will fuel a whole new round of complaints. But some of us prepared for that eventuality and waited before buying. No big deal. Come Gold Edition, Civ3 might please *even* the hard to please crowd, but if it doesn't, no big deal there, either.

[Zealot]

Fix the game. I don't get where's the doubt. If it needs fixes, it's because it's not working right. If it's not working right, it's not pleasing its customers!

I think it's quite simple to see it...
Unless everybody is pleased with v.1.17! Which the I ask why the thread of things to be included in v1.18...

[Spiffor]

Firaxis should definitely work on a patch : to enhance stacked movement (some ideas on these forums are intelligent, easy in terms of gameplay and probably implementable).
To make the editor what it has to be for the standard, scenarioless version : at least, all rules should be easily tweakable, and everything should be addable/deletable (buildings, units etc., not only govs.)
I hope there will also be free basic tools (like in Civ2 when it was released) to build scenarios : placing civ-specific starting points, placing and modifying cities and units etc. i hold the promises before the releases. I would understand that something as a macro language comes into an expansion though.

[Worthingtons]

WHen I think about it, what Firaxis have done makes sense, they realease a game which is the 'bare bones', and then the hardcore fans can buy an Expansion Pack.

In Such a pack it would be great to see :-

Multiplayer
REAL Stacked Movement and Combat
More Techs!,More Units,Improvements and Wonders...
Scenarios, with a good Editor
More Civ's

If they did this, I'd happily pay a good £20 for this.

I think Civ III is a little short when it comes to Technologies and this ought to be enhanced in an XP, There no shortage of ideas.