Installed, patched it. Tried a quick single-player game. All is good.
Tried multiplayer. . . Ack!
First try: Went to in-game browser. The screen is non-intuitive. Can't see list of players. Only two or three games are shown waiting for players. Double-clicked a game and saw another waiting room. The host launched. . .
At this point, my screen (and the host's I later learned) got very sluggish. Just choosing our tribe was agonizingly slow. And this was just the setup screen.
It took 10-15 seconds just to register each mouse click.
Eventually, my the screen froze altogether. I ended task and came back.
We tried again. Same thing. We tried again. This time, we got into the game. But then it froze again. My settler just sat there. . . unable to move. I could chat with the host, however, and he described the same thing.
We were both broadband. 100ms pings to each other.
So, I tried to host a turn-based game. Just me and him. Same thing(s) happened.
Then my brother got the game and brought it into work.
We tried using Gamespy instead of the in-game game browser. I set up a game and tried to host. My brother (who *is* behind a firewall, admittedly) was able to join the lobby I set up.
The first time I launched, he just got kicked to the main Gamespy lobby. The 2nd and 3rd time, his game would start to load, and then it would GPF on him. I would always get to the tribe-choosing screen. But by then, I had no players.
I came into work today and tried a test LAN game. It worked fine. But that isn't very helpful for those of us who need to play over the Internet.
I have a cleanly installed Windows XP Pro system. Here are my specs:
Pentium 4 2GHz Northwood CPU
ASUS P4B266-C Motherboard
512MB DDR PC3200
NVidia GeForce 4 4600 (VisionTek)
Sound Blaster Audigy X-Gamer
Cable Modem (no firewall)
3Com 3C905C-TX Network Card
Adaptec 29160N SCSI Adapter
SCSI Hard drives and CD-ROMs
Windows XP Pro SP 2
I must say, I usually stick up for gaming companies. When OSI released Ultima Online, I defended them and all their bugs because that game was so very complex and had to deal with so many different players doing unpredictable things.
But, really. . . there is no excuse for the state of this game. Nobody I see in the Gamespy lobby is able to reliably start a game. Most (95%?) haven't even successfully started one. Those that have were stuck in a lag-fest that was unplayable.
There are legendary successful games where people have played 1v1 for a while. . . but it usually crashes.
The game quite often crashes on me just when I start it, and then exit. Sheesh!
Who exactly is running this show? There is a patch. Yet the civ3.com site is not updated. Half the chatter in the lobbies is taken up by people saying: "Where is the patch?" "Go to firaxis.com".
There is no support page yet on Firaxis or Civ3's site either.
I have absolutely *no* problem with a patch being released alongside the game. If anything, that encourages me! Many fine games have done this. But, then, after patching, to find multiplayer in such an egregiously un-usable state. . .
Whatever happened to the Firaxis that released the Civil War games and Alpha Centauri? They weren't perfect, but they *functional*!
Finally, my last bit of disappointment. Unlike almost every other multi-player game I'm aware of. . . PTW will not let you type in a known IP address for a host. You *have* to go through Gamespy or the horrible in-game browser. Pardon me, but that's crap! How about a little bit of control for gamers who want it!
Again, I'm surprised at myself for being this upset about it. I usually give developers the benefit of the doubt. But, this. . . this is just beyond the pale. How in God's name did this non-functional pile of code ever make it out the door? How does Firaxis expect to maintain *any* reputation while foisting this on their fans?
I never complained about Civ3. I never complained about the editor. I never complained about the patches. But this, this is too much.
Hurin
Tried multiplayer. . . Ack!
First try: Went to in-game browser. The screen is non-intuitive. Can't see list of players. Only two or three games are shown waiting for players. Double-clicked a game and saw another waiting room. The host launched. . .
At this point, my screen (and the host's I later learned) got very sluggish. Just choosing our tribe was agonizingly slow. And this was just the setup screen.
It took 10-15 seconds just to register each mouse click.
Eventually, my the screen froze altogether. I ended task and came back.
We tried again. Same thing. We tried again. This time, we got into the game. But then it froze again. My settler just sat there. . . unable to move. I could chat with the host, however, and he described the same thing.
We were both broadband. 100ms pings to each other.
So, I tried to host a turn-based game. Just me and him. Same thing(s) happened.
Then my brother got the game and brought it into work.
We tried using Gamespy instead of the in-game game browser. I set up a game and tried to host. My brother (who *is* behind a firewall, admittedly) was able to join the lobby I set up.
The first time I launched, he just got kicked to the main Gamespy lobby. The 2nd and 3rd time, his game would start to load, and then it would GPF on him. I would always get to the tribe-choosing screen. But by then, I had no players.
I came into work today and tried a test LAN game. It worked fine. But that isn't very helpful for those of us who need to play over the Internet.
I have a cleanly installed Windows XP Pro system. Here are my specs:
Pentium 4 2GHz Northwood CPU
ASUS P4B266-C Motherboard
512MB DDR PC3200
NVidia GeForce 4 4600 (VisionTek)
Sound Blaster Audigy X-Gamer
Cable Modem (no firewall)
3Com 3C905C-TX Network Card
Adaptec 29160N SCSI Adapter
SCSI Hard drives and CD-ROMs
Windows XP Pro SP 2
I must say, I usually stick up for gaming companies. When OSI released Ultima Online, I defended them and all their bugs because that game was so very complex and had to deal with so many different players doing unpredictable things.
But, really. . . there is no excuse for the state of this game. Nobody I see in the Gamespy lobby is able to reliably start a game. Most (95%?) haven't even successfully started one. Those that have were stuck in a lag-fest that was unplayable.
There are legendary successful games where people have played 1v1 for a while. . . but it usually crashes.
The game quite often crashes on me just when I start it, and then exit. Sheesh!
Who exactly is running this show? There is a patch. Yet the civ3.com site is not updated. Half the chatter in the lobbies is taken up by people saying: "Where is the patch?" "Go to firaxis.com".
There is no support page yet on Firaxis or Civ3's site either.
I have absolutely *no* problem with a patch being released alongside the game. If anything, that encourages me! Many fine games have done this. But, then, after patching, to find multiplayer in such an egregiously un-usable state. . .
Whatever happened to the Firaxis that released the Civil War games and Alpha Centauri? They weren't perfect, but they *functional*!
Finally, my last bit of disappointment. Unlike almost every other multi-player game I'm aware of. . . PTW will not let you type in a known IP address for a host. You *have* to go through Gamespy or the horrible in-game browser. Pardon me, but that's crap! How about a little bit of control for gamers who want it!
Again, I'm surprised at myself for being this upset about it. I usually give developers the benefit of the doubt. But, this. . . this is just beyond the pale. How in God's name did this non-functional pile of code ever make it out the door? How does Firaxis expect to maintain *any* reputation while foisting this on their fans?
I never complained about Civ3. I never complained about the editor. I never complained about the patches. But this, this is too much.
Hurin
Comment