CTP2 must be better than CTP

[red_jon]

OK, I get it now

I would rather have a bug-free game than hotseat, it just seems a shame.

------------------
...And if the British Commonwealth and its people live for a thousand years, man will still say "this was their finest hour"- Winston Churchill.

[Flandrien]

What ?
No PBEM patch ???

Now I am really depressed.

[Paul]

I would rather have a bug-free game with hot-seat/pbem. These multiplayer options are important for turn-based strategy games and in my opinion are worth delaying the release if they can't be fixed before the scheduled release date.

However, if Activision decides not to put these options in the release version they should definately be added in a patch.

[Pyaray]

quote: Originally posted by Maestro on 11-01-2000 05:50 PM No PBEM patch ???

I didn't say that. I said that I don't know, and it's not currently planned. That doesn't mean no, and it certainly doesn't mean yes. It just means we (including myself) have to wait and see what happens.

Pyaray

[Monkey]

quote: Originally posted by Pyaray on 11-01-2000 06:36 PM I didn't say that. I said that I don't know, and it's not currently planned. That doesn't mean no, and it certainly doesn't mean yes. It just means we (including myself) have to wait and see what happens. Pyaray

I guess the final decision about patching the game really depends on whether the game sells well huh? Fair enough, after all the bottom line is that game companies are here to make money.

BTW the decision to cut PBEM/hotseat due to bugs is a good one. It is better to have a few good implemented features rather than many badly implemented ones. I've kept that generally rule in my software engineering efforts myself.

[Mike the Nuke]

I agree with JB. I don't care if the majority or minority desires some of these features. Unfortunately, I do not know for sure what the abbreviation PBEM stands for. I probably never used it. I did play the CTP I game over the internet several times, but enjoyed the game MOST under the 'HOTSEAT' mode. In this mode, my wife (who never thought she would ever play a CIV game who then found out she enjoyued it thoroughly) and my kids (same deal) and myself played each other along with friends and some AI's on the same computer! It was the ONLY reason we kept playing the game. If CTP II will not have this function and/or it will not be patched in very soon after its release, then you can take this game and shove it where the sun doesn't shine. In response to the designer expert who states how tough it is to do these deals I, with all respect, say "ITS YOUR JOB, quit making excuses. I wish I could do it, but I don't know how. I operated Nuclear Power Plants aboard the USS Enterprise. It wasn't always easy, but we had to make it work, no excuses. The first CTP was a great game. It needed some improvements and some unit value corrections (everyone has their own opinions) but deleting options that existed in the first game from the second game because its 'too hard' is nothing but a poor excuse. I WILL NOT BUY THE GAME (CTP II) AT ANY PRICED UNTIL THESE OPTIONS ARE INCLUDED AND BUGS FIXED, ETC. I WILL NOT RECOMMEND THE GAME TO ANYONE, BUT I WILL CONTINUE TO RECEOMMEND CTP I TO ALL MY FRIENDS THAT ENJOY THESE CIV GAMES. WHAT A DISSAPPOINTMENT! WE'VE (MY FAMILY) BEEN COUNTING THE DAYS FOR THE ARRIVAL OF THE NEW AND IMPROVED CTP-II, NOW IT APPEARS TO BE NOTHING WORTH WAITING FOR.

[MarkG]

i'm sorry, are you saying that you wont buy ctp2 cause it doesnt have a feature that you dont know what it is and will never use it??


btw, pbem means "play by e-mail"

[Kautilya]

Um Mark obviously you didn't read past the second line of Mike's post. He was talking about hotseat with which he plays CTP with his family.

I personally haven't played either on PBEM or hotseat. For me the biggest consideration is a strong AI for single player. However I have been told that PBEM is a good way to play multiplayer so that might be a consideration when considering future replay value. It appears that there are a lot of people for whom PBEM is very important so I think that Activision should announce early that a PBEM patch will be on the way if they don't want to lose too many sales.

[Dogberry]

I hope you all remember the suggestion lists that seemed to have been so painstakingly put together in this site and forwarded to Activision by this site, some of the suggestions had even appeared for the original CTP. What the hell does Activision do with them?! No PBEM, no hotseat, damn, NO WONDER, they are in CTP, why would people suggest it again?! I don't know about you, but multiplaying a civ game online realtime with friends is both time-consuming and a drag. PBEM is the way to go for me.

A 100 aussie dollar is a lot of money, I will definitely wait for the review this time around.

Cheers,

Dogberry.

[MidKnight Lament]

Thanks for letting us know, Pyaray (and for coming back here despite all the abuse).

You indicated that PBEM had a lot of bugs, and that's why it couldn't be included.... Is the same true for Hotseat?

------------------
- MKL
"And of course Henry The Horse dances the waltz!"
Shameless Plug: http://www.poetic-license.org celebrates it's First Birthday! All welcome.

[MadWoodster]

If alot of people buy the game, then Activision may decide there is no point in releasing a patch as they won't get any more sales, however, if everyone who wants more features doesn't buy the game, then Activision may realise how much money they could make by releasing a patch to add the particular features.
Incidently I don't care about PBEM or Hotseat and just want a fully-working single player game.

[Grumbold]

A fully working 1 player game with strong AI opponents is certainly my primary requirement. Having said that, it is certainly options like PBEM and 9+ civilisations which will keep the game alive by creating new challenges once the mechanics are familiar. No AI can be as cunning, malicious (or sometimes, stupid) as a whole bunch of real people. I will buy the game without those options and hope for future patches confident that AI loopholes can always be improved by SLIC mad Apolytoners even if Activision ignore them. Should it be full of fancy options but fatally bugged then my money will stay firmly in my pocket.

[hexagonian]

Can't say that I am totally happy about this...

But I do have to agree that it would be better if the game was released as bug-free as possible. It really does not make any sense to have the game released with PBEM/Hotseat and then have those games crash repeatedly because of bugs related to those issues. Imagine the uproar that would cause...

My assumption was based on the fact that Activision was able to address PBEM/Hotseat in CTP1, so it seemed to me that those features were a foregone conclusion in CTP2 and would of been implemented right from the start. And as much as I want a perfect game, the truth is that no game will give me every feature that I want. It will be funny to see when CIV3 is getting close to release, how many people will gripe because their 'pet' idea is not included - you can be assured this will happen too.

I still am looking forward to CTP2. Even if PBEM/Hotseat was not included, nor planned in the future, I would still get the game because I do enjoy single-play (CTP1 MedMod modified).

And if it is unbalanced, I have confidence in Wes/Nordicus and others who frequent this site to fix it!!

[Flandrien]

I too will buy the game, and wait for a PBEM patch.
If there is one thing that I learned from PBEM, it is to be patient.

[jbs]

I am senior software engineer, and I will be happy to send anyone my resume who does not believe that is my job. Just send me your e-mail address and I will send you a copy. I have written and released many applications and tools. The hardest part in fixing a bug is understanding what is causing it. I have been in the same position as Activision. I have an application that has a bug that I do not know what causes it. All I do know is that I only encounter that bug when I do X feature. So I remove that feature and release that tool. I have done this a few times to met a deadline. The application works fine for the initial data set, but once the customer starts stressing the tool with more data or repetitive use, that same unknown bug appears. That has happened to me every single time! If I have to release an application I always tell (I learned after my first experience) the customer what bug I could not correct so the customer is aware of potential problems and to report this immediately so I have additional data that I can use to correct the problem. If Activision knew exactly what was causing the bugs, then fixing them should not be hard. But if you are not sure, then deleting a feature does not guarantee that the bug is fixed and in my experience has never fixed it. Because if I was that sure of what was causing the bug I could fix it. So Activision deleting a feature doesn't fix a bug, it just makes it occur less often because you are removing stress from the program, but if the customer stresses it in some other way (lets say modification) then those bugs are likely to occur. And of course Activision will not support any modifications. So everyone who loves the modification feature has to worry about these unknown bugs.