Sounding the death knell for TBS?

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
MarkG,

That's a bit of a slanted view of what really happened doncha think? I frequented the Civ 3 boards as well as played the game when it came out (admittedly as a lurker). I got bored with Civ 3 long before the 1.21 patch came out....and Yin was quite right in his assessment of it's flaws.

The reason I am wondering if your memory is selective is because:

1. How long did it take Civ 3 to hit the 1 mil sales mark (hint: it took a long time)?

2. By the time it did hit that mark, Civ 3 was so discounted in retail that IG was actually taking a loss on each unit. We both know that Firaxis was rather displeased with Civ 3 as a whole.

3. Finally, I think even you would have to agree that PTW was an unmitigated (and thorougly deserved) disaster. What I find interesting is that many of the horrid reviews that PTW got actually revolve around the 1.29 version of Civ 3....not the PTW part itself.

The point I am making is that you should be careful when pulling out your Civ 3 comparisons...largely because IMHO the Moo crowd is a more rancorous and more finnicky lot. I also add that Moo three had a lot more Dev problems than Civ 3 and is grossly overdue and (probably) overbudget. That makes me less than optimistic that IG will patch this release in a serious way (i.e. I think IG will cut its losses). I might be wrong, but I doubt I am.

-Polaris

Edit: I also note in passing that Civ 3 had one major thing going for it that Moo 3 does not. FEEDBACK. Even that terrible first version of Civ 3 gave the user immediate feedback as to the status of his civilization and the manuals and in-game help, actually gave good information that allowed the user to adjust his game. In short Civ 3 was actually interesting to play (esp during the ancient period). I can not say the same for Moo III.

What your slant. Civ 3 did have some problen that where
fix. I have Daggerfall on my computer that have more bugs than MOO3 and Civ 3 ever will have. There is hardly any computer game release today that doesnot have bugs in it.

[Asmodean]

Just looking at my game shelf. It includes Civ3, Civ2, Civ2 ToT, CTP, HOMM2, HOMM3+Expansions, HOMM4+Expansion, SMAC, SMACX, Galactic Civilizations (which is only on my HD, since it's not released yet) Ascendancy, Imperium Galactica (which allthough not turn-based can be played in a semi turn-based mode), Merchant Prince II, Master of Magic, MoO3 and a few others.

If the TBS genre dies out, it will not!! be my fault. That said, I really don't think the genre will die. The fan-base is too big for that to happen. And with new initiatives (like Stardocks "Drengin.net" maybe the genre will even have a revival...who knows?? A few mishapped titles will not bring down the genre as a whole.

Asmodean

[asleepathewheel]

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
I got bored with Civ 3 long before the 1.21 patch came out....and Yin was quite right in his assessment of it's flaws.

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
1. How long did it take Civ 3 to hit the 1 mil sales mark (hint: it took a long time)?

How long? Is that world wide sales?

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
2. By the time it did hit that mark, Civ 3 was so discounted in retail that IG was actually taking a loss on each unit. We both know that Firaxis was rather displeased with Civ 3 as a whole.

link please

If they were so disapointed in the sales, then why would they continue to patch it, wouldn't a rational company cut their losses? And if they were disappointed in the initial sales, why would they put out an expansion, would seem to me if that were the case they would only be losing more money.

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
3. Finally, I think even you would have to agree that PTW was an unmitigated (and thorougly deserved) disaster. What I find interesting is that many of the horrid reviews that PTW got actually revolve around the 1.29 version of Civ 3....not the PTW part itself.

I don't understand this, the bad reviews I saw all bashed them for the MP. Few mentioned the SP changes, and then only in passing. I'm not sure you know what you're talking about.

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
The point I am making is that you should be careful when pulling out your Civ 3 comparisons...largely because IMHO the Moo crowd is a more rancorous and more finnicky lot.

Are you sure you lurked here during Civ3s release?

Originally posted by Ianpolaris
I also add that Moo three had a lot more Dev problems than Civ 3 and is grossly overdue and (probably) overbudget. That makes me less than optimistic that IG will patch this release in a serious way (i.e. I think IG will cut its losses). I might be wrong, but I doubt I am.

What is "patch this release in a serious way"? Somehow, I doubt that any number of patches would satisfy you. If they released an Ai and Pd fix, would that be enough( and some other minor details and bugs)? It probably would be for me, as I like the game fine right now, for the most part. The rest of your arguments are against the game's design, which is purely opinion based. To cloak it otherwise is to be disingenuous.

Ian, I've found that buying games is like rolling dice. You win some here and there, but when you don't you just have to cut your losses and move on, even if you feel that the dice were loaded. Sometimes life just isn't fair, but spending a significant amount of time *****ing about it is just a waste, IMHO.

[ChaotikVisions]

If everytime a strategy game came out that I didn't like they'd have died a long time ago. Its a matter of opinion, not fact. So you don't like the game, fine. Some like it, some don't. I'll never understand people who want sequels to just be the same game remade, I hate that crap. New concepts are needed, if they alienate some fans. I played MoO2 and enjoyed it, and now i'm enjoying MoO3. Its different then MoO2 and thats a good thing, not a bad thing.

[PDifolco]

TBS dead ? Huh, don't think so !
When people will play "Real Time Chess" we'll rediscuss it !

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by PDifolco
When people will play "Real Time Chess" we'll rediscuss it !

Real Time Chess

[Don K Hotay]

Civ3 and MOO3 are both great TBS games, and it seems clear that AI ineptitude is what's holding each back from being superb. I put down Civ3/ptw months ago, and I suspect in another few months, if the AI isn't somehow dramatically improved through a patch, I'll tire of MOO3 as well.

I thought multiplayer would bring these games to the next level of replayability, but unless you can manage to synchronize playing times with others and schedule a good LAN game, multiplayer is just a giant headache.

AI improvement is crucial for games, especially future TBS games, to succeed. As someone mentioned, computers are posing as fierce competitors to chess grandmasters. Hell, Deep Blue beat one! Why can't some of that good stuff be incorporated into TBS games like MOO3 and CIV3?

Quixote

[vmxa1]

Originally posted by Asmodean
Just looking at my game shelf. It includes Civ3, Civ2, Civ2 ToT, CTP, HOMM2, HOMM3+Expansions, HOMM4+Expansion, SMAC, SMACX, Galactic Civilizations (which is only on my HD, since it's not released yet) Ascendancy, Imperium Galactica (which allthough not turn-based can be played in a semi turn-based mode), Merchant Prince II, Master of Magic, MoO3 and a few others.

You sure you did not steal my HD? Well ok, I never had Merchant Prince. Oh yeah, no Moo1 or Moo2, so it must not be mine, sorry.

[CharlesBHoff]

Originally posted by Don K Hotay
Civ3 and MOO3 are both great TBS games, and it seems clear that AI ineptitude is what's holding each back from being superb. I put down Civ3/ptw months ago, and I suspect in another few months, if the AI isn't somehow dramatically improved through a patch, I'll tire of MOO3 as well.

I thought multiplayer would bring these games to the next level of replayability, but unless you can manage to synchronize playing times with others and schedule a good LAN game, multiplayer is just a giant headache.

AI improvement is crucial for games, especially future TBS games, to succeed. As someone mentioned, computers are posing as fierce competitors to chess grandmasters. Hell, Deep Blue beat one! Why can't some of that good stuff be incorporated into TBS games like MOO3 and CIV3?

Quixote

Well that AI program is running on than mainframe supercomputer only. Remember Star Reach from Interplay went in one month time from 45 dollar to 1.99 $ in the bargin bin. First no human player would win against the computer as the game was make so you have no change of winning. That is the lesson very game company know. That one game almost make Interplay go belly up.
I donot mind loseing than game it I have than change to win. In Star Reach you have no change to win.