JEFF BRIGGS Interview

[MarkG]

coracle, your posts have not been criticism, but insults. the next such post from you will equal to your second trip to mingapulco.

[Coracle]

OK NO COMMENT THEN.

Kindly remove also the insults directed at ME.

Speaking of "insults", for you to put Jimmytrick's comments, and mine, in a separate thread, and label it "garbage", is the height of the pejorative and insulting. But RHIP - Rank Has Its Priveleges!

[Christantine The Great]

YHNRIAOFTYDO

You have no rights in an online forum that you don't own.

Especially when the most it means to you is an outlet for your hate-filled crap.

[MarkG]

characterizing a person's posts is something different from characterizing the actual person

[Fitz]

1) I said I was dissapointed that Firaxis stopped supporting SMAC/X when it still had bugs. I am one of those who holds it up as an example of a game that CivIII could have aspired to in terms of a good game, albiet minus the bugs. CivIII is currently considerably less buggy than the end result of SMAX, which is the primary reason I play it instead (the secondary being that it is new, even if it is not better). And yes, that is an opinion.

2) I bought CivIII. Do I think they delivered a quality product? No, I do not. Just because you buy it doesn't mean that it is quality. You find that out after you buy it, not before. If you get ripped off, you get ripped off. If you get you $50 worth out of it, like I did, that still doesn't mean you got a quality product, it just means you didn't get ripped off completely. It does indicate that the game designers were primarily in it for a quick buck though.

3) That's because some of the questions would desperately be avoided by someone who is guilty as charged. Unfortunately, they would also be avoided by someone who considered the questioner to be making rediculous acusations. However, they are questions that certainly indicate the feeling of a lot of players. The difference between many of those players, and jt is he remains dedicated to pointing out the flaws. Coracle however is just a pain (I personally put him on ignore).

4) Yes, I didn't say deleted. I'm sorry if I implied that. I mean't that they have been removed from this thread so they cannot easily be commented on, so that they cannot make some people think as to whether they consider his comments valid, and so that they cannot be responded to (locked thread when I saw it).

As a closing comment, I fully realise that it is your forum and you can do as you like (to respond to another poster). I just think that jt has some good points, but that you have let the irate tone that he usually posts with influence you in such a way that you are far less tolerant of his points. I think that this is not a good thing.

Regardless, I will continue to argue the same points when necessary, that CivIII is an inferior product and that Firaxis and Sid Meier sold out, I'll just avoid using the inflamatory methods of jt (or god forbid, Coracle).

Next time I'll try to avoid going so far off topic. Back on-topic, I think that the questions asked were a little weak. I felt the responses were pretty weak too. However, if it was an email of questions sent and answers recieved, it makes more sense that it should be so.

[zulu9812]

Yeah - the questions were somewhat sycophantic and they certainly weren't representative of what I wanted to find out from Jeff. Next time, hopefully the questions will be a bit more probing and have a bit more bite.

btw - Fitz, I agree with everything you've said.

[MarkG]

I bought CivIII. Do I think they delivered a quality product? No, I do not. Just because you buy it doesn't mean that it is quality. You find that out after you buy it, not before. If you get ripped off, you get ripped off. If you get you $50 worth out of it, like I did, that still doesn't mean you got a quality product, it just means you didn't get ripped off completely. It does indicate that the game designers were primarily in it for a quick buck though.

a) if a company tries to rip off people it might sell on the first month, but it certainly wont sell on the sixth
b) by definition, if you get your $50 worth, you're not ripped off at all and you have goten a quality product

However, they are questions that certainly indicate the feeling of a lot of players

i see lots of lots of players talking strategies, writing stories and participating in tournaments that do not argue all the time about huge flaws and rip-offs

they cannot easily be commented on

i'm 100% certain that if there was a single valid argument in those posts, someone would have copied it here and commented on it. noone has so far.

I just think that jt has some good points

when he has used arguments, his threads/posts have run fine(even in the case when his intention was to troll). when his posts was 100% troll and non-argumentative comments he has been dealt differently

I will continue to argue the same points when necessary, that CivIII is an inferior product

since your posts are not deleted it probably means that i'm not a firaxis sychophant after all

However, if it was an email of questions sent and answers recieved, it makes more sense that it should be so.

all our interviews have been by mail(send a set of questions, get the answers back). the only exception was the moo3 one with Rantz.

live interviews can be considered the chats where i dont see many "jt-like" attitudes and questions for some strange reason.....

[TCO]

Fitz, you are still playing the game, months later yet you don't think it was worth 5o bucks. Either you like pain or you have unrealistic expectations fro 50 bucks of entertainment. I can blow that much on a sports game.

[alva]

Maybe Fitz's expectations were a bit high. therefore civ 3 was always going to be a dissapointment, but still likeable/enjoyable. I could be wrong offcourse

[MarkG]

gp, he said he got his $50. but he still doesnt consider it a quality product
i'm assuming that by his definition, a quality product would be worth $100 but he would have payed only $50

[notyoueither]

Yup. The designers are running with our bucks alright.

Right into the Poly chat room where Dan and Mike just spent many hours chatting with us. Chatted about other games, sports, SMAC, Civ3, or whatever else we brought up.

Mike signed off at about 3am his local time. I sure feel ripped off!

[JoeDaddy715]

This thread is funny.
The REAL bottom line is that, despite all the flaws (real and perceived) that you and I have found in this game, it's better than CIV one or two, at least to me and whoever else is still playing it. If it wasn't, I'd download an old version from some abandonware site or buy it really cheap used. Hell, I actually have the NES version of Civ1 on my pc, but I'd MUCH RATHER play civ3.... Civ1 (to me) was the coolest game ever (back then) and Civ3 kicks its buttox from here to Afghanistan... Even if it IS stupid that I can't airlift leaders, I can still commit genocide, and that's all we really want, right??????

[MarkG]

eeeer i want to build a civ to stand the test of time

[Fitz]

I didn't realize that all your interviews were by email Mark. Do you typically send one email, or do you send back and forth until satisfied or they start ignoring you?

Do you ever poll players for questions here in the forums first? If you do, it might be a good idea to specify first that you are or are not accepting technical questions.

I'll start a new thread if anyone cares to actually continue arguing on the other matter. If not, it'll die a natural death (or Marg can close it if it gets stupid/spammy).

[MarkG]

all questions are send in one mail. there is no "second round" of questions depending of the answers. this has been a choice of the companies of course as it easier to arrange and faster to execute. as opposed to a live interview: for an interview that you can read in 5 minutes we took over 90 minutes of Rantz Hoseley's life(thanks Rantz!)

we dont poll visitors for questions as we like interviews to be a surprise and could have "issues" on the selected questions we poll our staff though which is close to the same thing