Without Criticism, There Would Be No Decent Patching: Agree or Disagree?

[yin26]

I have seen Lib lately make the statement that the latest patch would never have been released / would never have addressed important issues such as stacking were it not for the critics trying to override "sychophantic" statements that Civ3 was/is just fine. Such a statement assumes two things that might help shape this discussion:

1) That Firaxis actually monitors criticism in some way and in some threads, at least.

2) That Firaxis would have had different priorities were it not for the results of #1.

Agree or Disagree: A good patching process requires critical fans?

[Salvor]

I voted "absolutely", but I think I should note a couple of caveats:

1) A good company should not rely solely on BBS's or other public forums for feedback on their products. They should proactively solicit critiques using CSI surveys, focus groups, and other methods, and should do so in a way that ensures valid cross-sections of their market and provides statistically meaningful results. "Whining", while often constructive, is not always truly representative of the market as a whole.

2) Not every complaint or concern needs to be addressed. "You can't please all the people all the time" pretty much sums that one up.

Now this isn't a criticism of Firaxis, this forum, or any of its members. I don't know what Firaxis' decision-making policy was, or even whether they did conduct CSI surveys and/or focus groups. And I'm not passing judgment or making commentary on any individual or aggregate posts made here or on any other forum. I'm just stating that it's best not to rely on a single means of collecting feedback when there's no way of knowing how representative that sample is of your target market.

[E_T]

Threshold

I think that they (IMHO) would put the the issues of the critics on low priority until the critisizm had reached a "threshold" level that they just couldn't ignore anymore. When, clearly, the large groundswell of stack movement/unit activation support was beginning to shift to the staunchest of noncritics, somthing had to be done, or it would really threaten there future plans for the game.

E_T

[KoenigMkII]

I voted for the top option: criticism is valid in general, in principle it should help.

But I sometimes think we fail to point out the +ves as throughly as we feed on the inevitable problems.

[I actually really like the interface + the advisor system, call me soft but I think Domestic advisor is helpful and kind of cute :-) ]

whats that THUD! in the background??

Pick yourself off the floor Libertarian! :-)

[Grrr]

Normal Criticism is useless for instance "I think Civ3 is stupid"
Constructive Criticism is extremely useful "I think Civ3 could do with an improvement in the functionality of the Artificial Intelligence's tech trade cheating".

[Encomium]

I resent your use of the term "whining" in the poll.

If everyone was as mindless and easily-pleased as some of the fanboys around here Firaxis would have no problem putting out shoddy underdeveloped merchandise over and over, besides not fixing what they got wrong in the first place.

[Spook42]

"Depends." As one who was banned a couple of times from the TalonSoft forums years ago, due to criticisms from me, I have certainly earned my "whiner's badge" in those days.

(And when it comes to historical wargames, I'm the worst kind of critic: a "grognard." )

But I always seek to maintain perspective where possible. If the criticisms are constructive and offered in a compelling way, it behooves the game developer (or a supporting tester or someone else "in the circle") to acknowledge the critique, and offer either an effective counter-argument or some indication to at least consider a future game revision. Otherwise, a shoot-from-the-hip gripe with no substance doesn't deserve even the time of day for a response.

[zergling]

"Depends" Constructive critics? very useful. Pure whining? grow up kid!!

hey yin, have you bought the game now? Or still waiting for the multiplayer-gold-edition??

[yin26]

I resent your use of the term "whining" in the poll.

Resent away. This is why we have a language full of nuances: "...even the sort that people might call 'whining,'..." Some people call what some other people do 'whining.' I make no apologies. In fact, this poll is intended in part to touch on the very issue you seem to resent. Sit back. Relax.

zergling: Still waiting, of course! Too many other great games to play while Firaxis fixes the beta. Anyway, Markos thinks I'm gonna crack because the last patch was so spectacular.

[Grumbold]

The suggested content of this patch was agreed at first pass so it was clearly finalised a long time ago. I can understand, tolerate and even appreciate a week or so of vocal protests over the lack or misimplementation of a certain feature. Even more useful is a careful analysis shorn of all the unnecessary invective. Beyond that point I believe it becomes meaningless bile ridden spam and the authors are just intent on making everyone feel miserable about what could otherwise be a generally positive playing experience. Having the bare faced gall to try and claim extensive credit for a lot of hard work by the developers, aided by all the contributory fans, is beneath contempt.

[Ironikinit]

Well put, Grumbold.

Ditto.

[Skanky Burns]

Yes, voicing a concern about an issue is the only way to let Firaxis know what the majority of us want.

However, past a certain point (when Firaxis must have already known about the issue and even commented on it) the complaining just becomes noise.

Then theres the criticism with no suggestion of how to improve the game or even something specific about the game that needs improving. Such as "Civ 3 sucks - go play CTP / Civ 2"
This type of whining is completely useless (as well as dull and repetitive)

[yin26]

Looking at the early results, it seems most of us believe to one degree or another that notifying Firaxis of our concerns is beneficial to both sides. Skanky Burns' comment brings up the next issue, which is: How do we know what particular issues Firaxis has paid attention to and is considering?

I submit that unless they actively tell us, we are BOUND to repeat ourselves and see the kind of whining we have seen. For one cannot simpy post a suggestion/criticism, get no official replies, and expect that the issue has been registered at Firaxis. Makes no sense.

[jackshot]

Originally posted by yin26
I submit that unless they actively tell us, we are BOUND to repeat ourselves and see the kind of whining we have seen. For one cannot simpy post a suggestion/criticism, get no official replies, and expect that the issue has been registered at Firaxis. Makes no sense.

Why not? The discussions continue, they listen in and occasionally say something. So?

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Spook42
"Depends." As one who was banned a couple of times from the TalonSoft forums years ago, due to criticisms from me, I have certainly earned my "whiner's badge" in those days.

Welcome in the club. This time I made the decision, not to buy any Talonsoft games anymore.

My vote is "depends". Feedback is appreciated even if it's negative, but b*tch fests and personal insults as seen at these boards are ignored and thus contraproductive.