Announcement

**Cesa** · April 21, 2002, 18:22

Yes, it is worth it.

There are no serious bugs/annoyances left in the gameplay, not as far as I can see.

Sure, we lack multiplayer, and the editor is not good enough for most people. But what counts the most at this stage is the gameplay, and it's finally really good. After this patch it truly feels solid, like civ2 did. I suggest you give it a try.

Of course it's not that hard to think of things you'd like to have improved (like a way to keep track of your trade deals for example), but the beta feeling is finally gone, and for the first time things works like intended.

**notyoueither** · April 21, 2002, 19:12

What are the biggest causes of your disappointment? Some issues have been addressed, but not all.

**Dinner** · April 21, 2002, 19:30

Originally posted by Cesa
Yes, it is worth it.

There are no serious bugs/annoyances left in the gameplay, not as far as I can see.

Sure, we lack multiplayer, and the editor is not good enough for most people. But what counts the most at this stage is the gameplay, and it's finally really good. After this patch it truly feels solid, like civ2 did. I suggest you give it a try.

Of course it's not that hard to think of things you'd like to have improved (like a way to keep track of your trade deals for example), but the beta feeling is finally gone, and for the first time things works like intended.

Thank you Cesa. I value what you have to say.

**roalan** · April 22, 2002, 17:02

another side

Read all the post on the patch. A LARGE number of players are complaining that it is not a good patch . I believe I will stick with 1.16 for the time being,there seems to be to many bugs in 1.21. Perhaps 1.22 will be better.

**Conqueror** · April 22, 2002, 17:32

1.21 is definitely far better than 1.17, and a bit better then 1.16, because of new options and large res. bug fix.

**roalan** · April 22, 2002, 17:37

patch

READ ALL other threads and also Civ Fanatics forum there are a LOT of people who are unhappy. I have read 100's of postings and I would say 60% unhappy 40% happy to a point. Very few say it is 100% with no pronlems. Check them out.

**player1** · April 22, 2002, 18:14

Re: patch

Originally posted by roalan
READ ALL other threads and also Civ Fanatics forum there are a LOT of people who are unhappy. I have read 100's of postings and I would say 60% unhappy 40% happy to a point. Very few say it is 100% with no pronlems. Check them out.

Funny!

Now look at the polls both at civfanatics & apolyton.
How would you rate 1.21f patch.
Results are GREAT!

So don't worry and install the patch.

**Cesa** · April 22, 2002, 18:15

You should check the polls both here and on Civfanatics that rate the patch. Only very few give it low ratings, pretty much everyone think it's really good. This is, of course regarding gameplay, not the editor, but I figured gameplay was what Oerdin was interested in.

Even if i seldom post, I read these forums often, and I can't find the 'negative' threads you talk about roalan. What is it people don't like?

**Cort Haus** · April 22, 2002, 18:40

Early days, but so far I like it, and my impression from the forum is that those who basically like Civ 3 are pleased with this patch, and many of those who don't like it will never like it.

It may be a matter of taste as to whether something is good or not. You liked CTP2 - so did I, but many hated it and declared it fundamentally flawed (don't know why). I gave up because of the AI's every-turn border violations. I never could get the mod to fix that - which mod do you use?

Unlike Firaxis, who are improving / finishing their product, Activision dumped CTP after poor sales. Poor sales which were not helped, I expect, by the torrent of fury against the game here on the net. If the Internet had been there for gamers in 91, Civ 1 might even have got criticised out of existence.

So, which part of Civ 2 do you miss most - the endless caravanning, the familiarity of howitzer-blitzes, the lack of borders, the limited diplomacy, stack-death?

Civ 3 - perfect it ain't, (better trade& diplo interface w.b nice) but nor were the others, and I've come to accept that there's no such thing as perfect software. Perfection is too subjective, and development too expensive.

So I don't think there's need to worry that Fireaxis are not treating fans concerns "with directness". The worst mistake they could make would be to try and introduce everyone's demands. Design decisions should not be rushed and in today's highly complex software, it's almost impossible to have both (a) stability and (b) constant change. They're fixing bugs, improving the AI, finishing the editor, and generally getting there.

What is there to lose by downloading the patch and trying a game?

**roalan** · April 22, 2002, 19:08

patch

I was not checking polls I was reading comments.

**roalan** · April 22, 2002, 19:10

patch

In this forum alone check out the top line or so " Bugs and problems", under Gereral there are , at this writting, 125 mostly complaints about the patch.

**Coracle** · April 22, 2002, 19:14

Originally posted by Cort Haus
So I don't think there's need to worry that Fireaxis are not treating fans concerns "with directness". The worst mistake they could make would be to try and introduce everyone's demands. . . What is there to lose by downloading the patch and trying a game?

How about a lot more of my time and life??

As for Firaxis and fans concerns, we complained for months about how slow the game is, so Firaxis' solution is to make it even slower, while taking away a popular cheat like "multi.sav", while not giving us scenario-building - that they will try to sell us soon!

Better Firaxis HAD dumped Civ 3 a few months ago - and started on Civ 4.

For five years we discussed on forums what we'd like to see in Civ 3, such as a First Strike Response option in nuclear war. We didn't get that, but we did get crazy stuff like Culture Flippinng.

**roalan** · April 22, 2002, 19:40

patch

Don't get me wrong I like Civ3 better in most ways then Civ2. I would like to see real scenarios is C3 because C2 scenarios were stupid especially the WW2 ones. As a war gamer for 30 years and A.R.E.A. rated the scenarios in C2 were YUK. Otherwise as I said Civ.3 is better then Civ2. But I am using the 1.16patch and will not switch until the current patch is better then 1.16 and so far that is not what I have read in a large number of reports..
I also made a lot of changes to Marals Map and heard from some that they may be destroyed by patch 1.21f So I will stick to 1.16f until better comes out. Perhaps they should start Civ4 but not for $50

**player1** · April 22, 2002, 20:01

Re: patch

Originally posted by roalan
Don't get me wrong I like Civ3 better in most ways then Civ2. I would like to see real scenarios is C3 because C2 scenarios were stupid especially the WW2 ones. As a war gamer for 30 years and A.R.E.A. rated the scenarios in C2 were YUK. Otherwise as I said Civ.3 is better then Civ2. But I am using the 1.16patch and will not switch until the current patch is better then 1.16 and so far that is not what I have read in a large number of reports..
I also made a lot of changes to Marals Map and heard from some that they may be destroyed by patch 1.21f So I will stick to 1.16f until better comes out. Perhaps they should start Civ4 but not for $50

Why not rewrite those mods to 1.21f format?

That way you won't have problem anymore.

Anyway, many intresting things can be done with new patch.

For exaple I made one scenario which uses RANDOM MAP.

All players start with several unis, settlers and industrial tech.

It was fun.

It started to look like real Scenario.

Announcement

v1.21 is it worth it?

v1.21 is it worth it?

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment