What do we think of PTW now?

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


Are you always so fast in judging people?

Fact is, I did a search for the PTW thread with the most replies, read through it, and agreed the most with Coracle (though I am even still less impressed with CivIII the original). I will not buy PTW, before it is down to $5, and perhaps not even then. To charge anything at all for a patch is an effrontery (though it is exactly what I expected from Firaxis). Still no real editor, MP not quite working, few new features, I mean: what is NOT bad about this? Enlighten me, o wise one!

No apology Comrade Tribune. The guy is a study in self inflicted suffering. You wished to quote him and adopt his tone (including CAPS).

I would hazard a guess that you do not play Civ3 that much. If I am correct, then I agree with you, the SP improvements are not that much for you.

However, if you like Civ3, and lets face it, a million copies of Civ3 were sold so there's gotta be a few of us out there... then even the SP enhancements would be worth the price to a lot of us.

Let's not stop there. Let's continue on shall we? Civ is an SP game. SP is what has sold copies of this game in the past. SP is what will keep Civ going for more years than I'll live (I'd bet). Yes, MP was missing from the original, and yes the XP is very much named to draw the MP crowd. It ain't finished. Just like a lot of other products of the computer industry (not just games) core functions of the product are being flashed or patched after release.

So do me a favour, save your chortling till after Firaxis says they are done. In the mean time it just sounds like more trolling by a guy who never liked Civ3 in the first place. Right?

[The Pioneer]

Right on notyoueither

What surprises me is that these people still buy the game or plan to buy the game if the price drops

So long...

[woody]

Originally posted by notyoueither
So do me a favour, save your chortling till after Firaxis says they are done. In the mean time it just sounds like more trolling by a guy who never liked Civ3 in the first place. Right?

Well, I like Civ3 (1.29 patch), but I think Firaxis deserves all the bashing they get for repeatedly releasing crappy games on the initial release.

When they start charging money, the game is done. I don't see anything written on the retail box that says, "This game is not yet finished. Please buy it, and we might release a patch to make it work in a few months." They are selling crappy software. Period.

I learned my lesson with Civ3. Never again will I buy a Firaxis product until several months after it is released. Civ3, after all the patches, is a fantastic game and worth every penny. But they never should have released it a year ago. It only became playable after the first patch (when fighters started working).

[-proletarian-]

To be honest, the SP additions alone were what enticed me to but PTW, and I paid $50 for it. (Cdn$)


I don't regret my purchase, and once MP is fixed it'll all be gravy.




However, I do think that Infogrames is a bushleague publisher, and would be very happy if they went bankrupt tomorrow. Maybe then a REAL publisher would step up and buy the rights to Civilization and we'd all be a lot happier.....

[player1]

Originally posted by -proletarian-
However, I do think that Infogrames is a bushleague publisher, and would be very happy if they went bankrupt tomorrow. Maybe then a REAL publisher would step up and buy the rights to Civilization and we'd all be a lot happier.....

Just not it be Activison.
They are 10x worse then Infogrames.

[notyoueither]

Originally posted by woody


Well, I like Civ3 (1.29 patch), but I think Firaxis deserves all the bashing they get for repeatedly releasing crappy games on the initial release.

When they start charging money, the game is done. I don't see anything written on the retail box that says, "This game is not yet finished. Please buy it, and we might release a patch to make it work in a few months." They are selling crappy software. Period.

I learned my lesson with Civ3. Never again will I buy a Firaxis product until several months after it is released. Civ3, after all the patches, is a fantastic game and worth every penny. But they never should have released it a year ago. It only became playable after the first patch (when fighters started working).

Point, but...

It is very common in the computer industry for products to be released with major problems and fixed afterwards by means of patches and flashes and various other updates. It happens every day.

I guess I am a bit more patient with this than most. However, I see no reason to hold Firaxis to a higher standard than MicroSoft, Asus, Intel, ATI, nVidea, etc.

I will grant to those who waited for MP that the initial release and the first patch must be cruelly frustrating, but it is being fixed just as many other products are fixed after release.

Your approach of not buying a product before you have reliable reports of it being fixed and working on the whole is the proper solution for those who do not want to be bothered. The people who rush out to buy the latest products as soon as they are released do not joke about 'the bleeding edge' for nothing, and bleeding does not just refer to the pocket book.

[Tiberius]

Originally posted by woody
I learned my lesson with Civ3. Never again will I buy a Firaxis product until several months after it is released. Civ3, after all the patches, is a fantastic game and worth every penny. But they never should have released it a year ago. It only became playable after the first patch (when fighters started working).

If there had been a poll in october 2001, asking what would you chose:
1. Release an almost finished Civ3 and patch it later or
2. Wait another 3-6 month until the game is perfect and bugless
I'd bet all my money that the results would have been something like:
1. 75% (at least)
2. 25% (at most)

[Adm.Naismith]

Originally posted by Tiberius
If there had been a poll in october 2001, asking what would you chose:
1. Release an almost finished Civ3 and patch it later or
2. Wait another 3-6 month until the game is perfect and bugless
I'd bet all my money that the results would have been something like:
1. 75% (at least)
2. 25% (at most)

An that result would explain a lot about world raising trouble and growing brain disease... (Just Kidding... almost).

[WarpStorm]

Originally posted by Tiberius
If there had been a poll in october 2001, asking what would you chose:
1. Release an almost finished Civ3 and patch it later or
2. Wait another 3-6 month until the game is perfect and bugless

I know which way I would have voted. You could count me in the 75% group. If people answered honestly it'd probably be even higher than 75%.

[lockstep]

Originally posted by Tiberius
If there had been a poll in october 2001, asking what would you chose:
1. Release an almost finished Civ3 and patch it later or
2. Wait another 3-6 month until the game is perfect and bugless
I'd bet all my money that the results would have been something like:
1. 75% (at least)
2. 25% (at most)

Yes, but while the release version of vanilla Civ3 was 'almost finished' (broken air superiority being a major bug), Civ3/PTW is still not 'almost finished' after the first patch (MP, the main selling point, still doesn't work as advertised).

[woody]

Originally posted by Tiberius

If there had been a poll in october 2001, asking what would you chose:
1. Release an almost finished Civ3 and patch it later or
2. Wait another 3-6 month until the game is perfect and bugless
I'd bet all my money that the results would have been something like:
1. 75% (at least)
2. 25% (at most)

That might be the result if you asked people here, which are of course much more addicted to Civ than most people who bought it. But Firaxis has to be careful of their reputation to the vast majority of gamers, not just the ones who post in dedicated Civ forums.

Most people here will eventually buy any Civ game, regardless of past experience. So, Firaxis can release utter garbage and still get 75% of us to buy it. But they make there real money from selling to the rest of the world that doesn't even know Apolyton exists. And, Firaxis is digging their own grave with all these buggy releases.

How many people who buy games actually even download a patch? I'd bet that most do not. I'd also bet that most of them won't be buying Civ4, based on their experiences with the 1st release of Civ3. After the 1.29f patch, Civ3 was an excellent game, but it took 9 months to get there! And now... they've gone back to the same bug-ridden release style with PtW.

Contrast Civ with something like Age Of Empires. I bought AoE, and I never even bothered checking for any patches, because it worked just fine out of the box.

[Argos65987]

Originally posted by woody


How many people who buy games actually even download a patch? I'd bet that most do not.

I would take this bet. I think most computer gamers (especially the type that by Civ style games) would know about patches and check before just writing it off as a learning experience.

Contrast Civ with something like Age Of Empires. I bought AoE, and I never even bothered checking for any patches, because it worked just fine out of the box.

A valid point. AoE worked fine for me out of the box, so I never looked for patches either. However, any game that I had trouble with I would usually check the developers/publishers pages for FAQs and Downloads.

Just my 2 cents

[MosesPresley]

quote: "If there had been a poll in october 2001, asking what would you chose:
1. Release an almost finished Civ3 and patch it later or
2. Wait another 3-6 month until the game is perfect and bugless
I'd bet all my money that the results would have been something like:
1. 75% (at least)
2. 25% (at most)"

Here is a poll for you:

1. How many people prefer free beer?
2. How many people prefer to pay for their beer?

I would bet that %100 percent would choose number 1.

[kittenOFchaos]

I think most people that fumed at PTW on release don't appreciate that Firaxis isn't blind to the problems and are also blind to the Firaxis track record on providing patches.

I am POSITIVE that subsequent patches in the near future will bring a significant improvement to the multiplayer aspect of the game. I agree completely with Warpstorm that Firaxis are a small company, pursuing a grand vision within an extremely tight deadline set by a domineering publishing partner.

What annoys me most of all is people who have no conception of the limitations of their internet connection in providing seamless play...56k modem and you don't expect lag?

[Zero]

Originally posted by Argos65987


I would take this bet. I think most computer gamers (especially the type that by Civ style games) would know about patches and check before just writing it off as a learning experience.

I second that. Patching has been a cultural norm for gamers. Especially in Online multiplayer gaming where often latest patch is almost required everywhere. Most hard core console-only gamer are often culture shocked by this fact.

I don't think this is any good thing, I hate patches, but at least such evil exists to fix a greater evil... :T

What annoys me most of all is people who have no conception of the limitations of their internet connection in providing seamless play...56k modem and you don't expect lag?

I agree. As technology moves foward, those who are left behind will be regarded less and less. More games will consider less about modem users and model games toward broadband online playing. I'm not telling 56kers to suck it up and deal with it or get a broadband, but its just the way it works eventually... (could you imagine a 28.8k whining this day and age?)