Is Firaxis Just Like Microsoft?

[Alex]

I like Windows XP. I'm somewhat disappointed with Civ3. Firaxis is not like Microsoft. Oranges are not apples. Hmm, I'm hungry.

[Cyclotron]

Yep, the AI was pretty bad, but for its era I thought Ascendancy was a surprisingly innovative game. There is a patch for "better" AI, but it really just makes the AI more agressive. I was part of the Ascendancy community for a long time before TLF closed their forums, and since the code is so open in a lot of places we found ways to give the AI advantages, play specialized games, etc.

You're right, it pales in comparison to any game I have now, but it was one of my first TBS games and I was amazed to find anybody else who actually still had it.

[vmxa1]

Yes the AI was about the weakest around, but it still fun. The first time I usethe long range orbital whopper and the nanomanipulator I was hooked. I have the ANTAG version as well.

[Chemical Ollie]

I might have a lot of complaints about bugs in both Microsoft products and CIV3. Quite a few times I had said about Bill Gates: "How could he become the richest man in the world by selling crap that doesn't work?" However, the alternative of not having Windows or Civilization would be even worse.

One comment that is a little off topic: No matter how much RAM you get, you can be sure that Bill Gates will be there to fill it with things you didn't ask for. My job PC quite often needs to run on virtual memory even with only Word open. I also remember upgrading the RAM of my old Mac from 8 to 24 MB. MS office jumped from using 6 MB to 16 MB. At least the available RAM for other applications when Office was open 13-doubled from 0.5 to 6.5 MB (the system took 1.5 MB).

[cgannon64]

Re: Re: Is Firaxis Just Like Microsoft?

Originally posted by Tassadar5000
I have to agree with the others, your comparison isn't that great.

However Windows XP in my experience, well, sucks. It's incompatible with almost every piece of software I own....In fact, Civ3 didn't work at all (And stpuid support didnt help..."Oh your not an administrator" ugh.). But thats just me.

Compared to ME, XP is a huge improvement. ME is the system you're thinking of: compatible with nothing.

Why do you think Firaxis purposely left out the gameplay elements you mentioned? Thats just...plain evil!

CG

[Chemical Ollie]

The initial post reminds me of the dangers of having a TQM (Total Quality Management) system in your company without combining it with common sense. A basic idea in TQM is to make continuous improvements. This might in some cases stop you from going all the way at once, since you will have nothing left to improve.

The EU's EMAS (Environmental Management an Audit Scheme) works like that. You could theoretically dump millions of tonnes of toxic waste into a river each year and still get an EMAS licence - as long as you make small improvements each year. If you get a state-of-the-art filtering equipment and reduce the waste to 1 tonne per year in one shot, but stop to make annual improvements, you could theoretically lose your EMAS licence.

[Chieftess]

Ugh.. I'll have no one comparing a company in "my backyard" to microsoft.

(then again, I really need this "chieftain" title changed...)

[vmxa1]

Olaf you just reminded me that I need to get Warlods 3 up to see if it use all of my 512MB now. Each time I added more mem to my pc the game shows as using it all. The last time Ihad 256. Thanks for the motivation.

[CapTVK]

Originally posted by cyclotron7

You're right, it pales in comparison to any game I have now, but it was one of my first TBS games and I was amazed to find anybody else who actually still had it.

Well, Ascendancy was sort of considered the next Master of Orion (MOO). Many MOO fans also played Ascendancy but the funny thing is that the gameplay in MOO was considered better despite it being older. But you can only make that particular judgement if you played MOO in it's prime as a personal point of reference.

But if you never played MOO then I suppose Ascendancy would become your point of reference. It's just a shame that it's predecessors are left out of the equation. While there's a lot learn from them on gameplay and balancing aspects. All classics just fade away...and their lessons are forgotten.

[vmxa1]

Moo faded away? Not to me. I still play it often after at least 2000 games (yeah that is sick).

[Cyclotron]

I actually never heard of MOO until I played the Civ2 scenario of that name. Go figure.

I thought some valuable stuff could have been taken away from Ascendancy. Supposedly, TLF is working on Ascendancy II, but that has been sitting around for years. They had a forum on their old website, but they never spoke to us there or answered our e-mails about Ascend2. Eventually, after a few years, they re-did the site and thus deleted the forums.

TVK, that's a good lesson... companies should remember the lessons of previous games. It certainly would have helped Civ3 be even better.

[vmxa1]

TLF is making it a an online game and not getting anywhere as far as I can see. I miss the old board and have gone back many times hoping it was reinstated.

[Coracle]

Originally posted by sprucemoose3311
"Xp pro requires a 1.3 Ghz processor? what are you, crazy? My fiance runs it fine on a 700, and she's under in ram and harddrive space. And it runs perfectly. It doesn't help you to distort the facts."


read closer, it is suggested requirements. what microsoft claims to be needed for optimum preformance

You are only partly correct about Firaxis, but mostly right about Microsoft. Their Windows Me OS was garbage, as was their "support".

Firaxis obviously left out important and enjoyable apects of the game DELIBERATELY - no scenarios when those were one of the most popular features of Civ 2!? That's just one of example of many discussed on these forums for the past year.

Obviously it also held back a lot of stuff so we'd buy PTW. Well, some of us bought it.

I don't know if they are planning on doing a Civ 4, but so many of us were turned off by Civ 3 that I'd never buy a Firaxis version again.

BUT. . . do not always assume a conspiracy when there is just a lot of ineptitude and stupidity involved. We saw a rushed beta game hit the stores a year ago for $50 a pop, and many of the insoluble problems remain the result of it being hurried to market with dismal playtesting.

[Naiveplayer]

To compare Firaxis and Microsoft to me is folly the way it's put to you.

You try to portray it as a conspiracy that Firaxis is operating in the same way as Microsoft in purposefully withholding certain features to put in Civ4, which to me doesn't sound like they're doing that, really.

If Firaxis was like Microsoft, I would have to say it's in the manner that they purposefully did not allow Civ2 scenarios to be compatible with the Civ3 Editor. Of course nowadays all companies do that, so it's not a microsoft thing.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by Coracle
no scenarios when those were one of the most popular features of Civ 2!? That's just one of example of many discussed on these forums for the past year.

Civ2 had only 2 scenarios, with no new units, graphics, sounds, or anything else. You had to by an XP to get real scenarios. Sound familiar?