...
I agree that the civ community needs fresh blood ( how many of us came from civ II or SMAC ? ), but a game with some logical flaws in his core system and with a sometimes hard management ( I really miss the city search funtion of civ III, especially when in war ( "the enemy is near XYZ" ... Where the hell is that? scroll, scroll , zoom in, zoom out, F1 , search again..... ) ) may not atract a lot of people, in spite of the shiny graphics ( even AOE3 beats Civ IV to the points in there )
...


If you bring up the event log in the upper left corner and click on the message about enemy near XYZ it will take you there. This applies to any of these messages, including great people being born in cities you don't know anything about.

IMHO the civ IV engine needs some tweaks, because it still causes diferent behaviour from a AI if the player is human or not in higher levels( not talking about bonuses, simply diferent behaviour, like the WFYABTA issue ( always Noble to a AI, diferent level to human ( it can help the human in Warlord- , but certainly it is a handicap in Prince + ) ) or the fact that AI -AI deals never fail ( unlike the AI demands to human.... makes AI - Human relations to sour easier than AI - AI ones ) , the fact that warmongers respect bonus does not apply to AI - human or the barb archer uprise issue in Prince+ ( but that is a ( not so ) simple XML change , unlike the above ones ( that require some code tweaking ) ) ). I would like that next version of Civ ( for this one is too late ) game core didn't produced this kind of issues... and after having a completely blind game, all those little tweaks ( like the find city option, the glance, maybe the long range arties ( I didn't like their removal from civ IV, a thing that was a conscious move to prevent the very wierd situation of civ III, where they were virtually immortal ( didn't really fight and it is captured, not destroyed ) ) can be in hand...

But here we are way off topic .....

@ welnic

I know that, but the civ III find city function was more versatile....

P.S. Before anyone says: "Well, they had to make choices, based upon limited time and resources," I know that. The point is they would have had more time and more resources if they weren't so focused on 3D. And, for many of us, the trade off of game play elements for 3D is not a good one.

I doubt very much that it was a tradeoff. Firaxis used the gamebryo engine for their 3d (which they already had experience of through Pirates). So it was not that significant an "extra workload" -- compared to generating a new 2D engine from scratch (the old one probably was not reusable). "Features" like ranged artillery were dropped because the lead designer (Soren) didn't like the way they worked for the new game. Civ3's tactic of "bring enough artillery that your troops only ever fight 1-hit-point battles" would have been a game-breaker for Civ4, because of the change in the way hit points work (a stack of artillery would reduce the mech infs to 0.1HP at no risk to themselves, and then ancient warriors would be able to knock them over... nobody would ever upgrade non-ranged offensive troops, but only artillery and some defenders to keep them safe.)

Saying you'd gladly give up ranged artillery for other improvements is a false choice. They obviously figured out how to implement it and that it was a good enough feature to include in Civ3. Why not include it plus new functionality in Civ4? Why not build on success?

The implication that they didn't implement ranged artillery because they didn't have the time to implement it seems like a real stretch. Isn't it more likely they didn't implement it because it was horribly unbalanced? The idea of being able to attack a stack with no way of countering it is a serious game flaw. Fixing that flaw by not implementing that feature strikes me as a design choice, not a matter of reduced "funtionality".

Bh

After reading all these replies, I just have to jump back in here, and it'll be the only thing I'll say.

Firaxis has proven a lot of things to me (few of them good), as all the brouhaha on this forum can attest. The way they've screwed up the last 2 patches have told me they're a company in decline as far as creating quality products go. They used to do good work, but until gaming companies get their act together and start better QA, forget it. I'm tired of paying money out for merchandise that's shoddy. If someone sold appliances that worked like this, you can bet every governmental agency in existence would be all over their butts.

I'll just wait 1-2 years and wait until the price drops to the bargain bin level and they have multiple patches out which (hopefully) fixes things. BtS was the first game I've ever brought new, and boy, do I regret it. Thank God for people like Bhruic and the modders who make this game worth playing.

Heck, I even wait to buy my PS2 games after reading multiple reviews and waiting for some time to see how the customers like it on the boards (and to find the bugs). It's saved me a lot of aggravation.

I think if everyone were a bit careful with their purchases, companies would be forced to release better products and devote more time to customer satisfaction rather than pleasing shareholders.

I'm confused, CivAgamenmnon, if "everyone" were a bit careful as you explain, then nobody would buy games new. Thus, there would be NO second-hand PS2 games, and there would be no "customers on the boards" to find the bugs.

I'm not saying Take2/Firaxis is perfect... far from it... but I also disagree with the customer model you suggest. That's not an answer either.

Wodan

*shrug* Everyone has an opinion, Wodan. :) I'm just stating what works for me. There'll always be people that have to have the newest thing on the market. Let them spend their money. I'll wait and laugh my head off until the price drops. :)

Humans can be so amusing. :)

This thread has, imo, degenerated into a lot of random b****ing that has no factual basis and is nothing more than opinion. There are a few people still posting with some facts and logic and to you I say maybe don't waste your time with these unhappy civ3ers o.o

I agree that the civ community needs fresh blood ( how many of us came from civ II or SMAC ? ), but a game with some logical flaws in his core system and with a sometimes hard management ( I really miss the city search funtion of civ III, especially when in war ( "the enemy is near XYZ" ... Where the hell is that? scroll, scroll , zoom in, zoom out, F1 , search again.....

What Welnic said above....



Just noticed that Welnic above beat me to it with this suggestion........

This thread has, imo, degenerated into a lot of random b****ing that has no factual basis and is nothing more than opinion. There are a few people still posting with some facts and logic and to you I say maybe don't waste your time with these unhappy civ3ers o.o
I guess. That's the "vocal minority" in action.

My problem is when the vocal minority advocates something that is nonsensical. Or, when the advocated action doesn't work unless it is a minority doing it.

Wodan

With all due respect, you and Wodan are missing the point. Of course Civ4 added some new functionality. The question is, why did we have to lose other functionality at the same time? Saying you'd gladly give up ranged artillery for other improvements is a false choice. They obviously figured out how to implement it and that it was a good enough feature to include in Civ3. Why not include it plus new functionality in Civ4? Why not build on success?



You know I have stayed out of posting in this thread for days but this artillery bit is just a pet peeve of mine.
I like that you cannot bombard from two squares away The only way I would like to see that implimented at all would be iff you could have couter battery artilery fire from the target damage your stack from two squars away as well.....

So this is not a bit of lost funtionality to me but a GOOD design desicion. I understand that you do not like it but please do not substitue your desires for how the game should have been designed for truly lost functionality they are not nessecarily one and the same.

if you want to focus on lost functionality and not simply differences in game play you would be better off on saying that you miss things like the throne room or other things like that that are truly missing from the game and not a feature that was redesigned not removed.....

The implication that they didn't implement ranged artillery because they didn't have the time to implement it seems like a real stretch. Isn't it more likely they didn't implement it because it was horribly unbalanced? The idea of being able to attack a stack with no way of countering it is a serious game flaw. Fixing that flaw by not implementing that feature strikes me as a design choice, not a matter of reduced "funtionality".

Bh

Exactly, Direct attack by artillery is where Civ IV ADDED functionality rather than subtracted from it
Civ 3's Artillery were nonfunctional (in terms of any function that led to a balanced, fun game)

Now if you want a truly Realistic combat model with ranged attack for artillery you either have

1 hour turns (not your time, game time.. so that 6000 years= about 500,000 turns... not sure even super marathon players want that)
OR
Simultaneous autoCombat turns of armies over an entire area v. armies over an entire area (my personal favorite, but definitely a VERY complex idea to do well... maybe for civ V or even civ VI if EVER)

"Features" like ranged artillery were dropped because the lead designer (Soren) didn't like the way they worked for the new game.

Exactly. Rather than spending the time and resources to make it right, they simply dropped it. I once produced a musical where we had the same problem. The director didn't have the time or creative resources to fix certain numbers in the show. So, the numbers were cut. The result? A shorter and less entertaining show.

The implication that they didn't implement ranged artillery because they didn't have the time to implement it seems like a real stretch. Isn't it more likely they didn't implement it because it was horribly unbalanced? The idea of being able to attack a stack with no way of countering it is a serious game flaw. Fixing that flaw by not implementing that feature strikes me as a design choice, not a matter of reduced "funtionality".


That's what artillery does in real-life and there are ways to counter it. And there were ways to counter it in Civ3. You're really making my point: It was "horribly unbalanced" and rather than spending the time and resources to make it right, they simply dropped it. So, it's not a stretch at all.

No matter how one tries to spin it, either they didn't resort sufficient time and resources to things like ranged artillery or they decided it wasn't a concept worth implementing. You can say they were dropped because "the lead designer (Soren) didn't like the way they worked for the new game," or because they were "horribly unbalanced," but you're saying the same thing: Rather than spending the time and resources to make it right, they simply dropped it.

Think of it this way: If they could find a way to "make it work" and not "horribly unbalanced," wouldn't ranged artillery add an extra dimension to the game? Rather than having to bring your artillery right up to your opponents face (which doesn't happen in real life), you'd actually be able to use it as it was intended to be used.

That's what artillery does in real-life and there are ways to counter it. And there were ways to counter it in Civ3. You're really making my point: It was "horribly unbalanced" and rather than spending the time and resources to make it right, they simply dropped it. So, it's not a stretch at all.

Ok, you seem to be misunderstanding what I'm saying. You're saying rather than fixing it, they dropped it. I'm saying dropping it is fixing it. I don't care how it works in real life. Civ IV is not a real life simulator. If something from real life breaks game balance, it should be thrown out to preserve game balance. Such is the case here.

No matter how one tries to spin it, either they didn't resort sufficient time and resources to things like ranged artillery or they decided it wasn't a concept worth implementing.

Er, yes. But you are trying to say the former, while I (and others) are saying the latter. And the two have completely different meanings when it comes to the point you are trying to make. If they consciously made a choice not to implement something, then it's a game design issue, and not one of insufficient time/resources.

Bh

I don't care how it works in real life. Civ IV is not a real life simulator. If something from real life breaks game balance, it should be thrown out to preserve game balance. Such is the case here.
Bh

Exactly.

I would add to that this game is a product of somebody else's labor, so they have zero responsibility to even make a game that you will like - at all. It's their game, they made it, and you can hate if you like but they don't have to care one bit. If you don't like it don't buy it. If you already bought it sell it or feed it to your cat or just throw it away. Life goes on.

You know I have stayed out of posting in this thread for days but this artillery bit is just a pet peeve of mine.
I like that you cannot bombard from two squares away The only way I would like to see that implimented at all would be iff you could have couter battery artilery fire from the target damage your stack from two squars away as well.....

So this is not a bit of lost funtionality to me but a GOOD design desicion. I understand that you do not like it but please do not substitue your desires for how the game should have been designed for truly lost functionality they are not nessecarily one and the same.

if you want to focus on lost functionality and not simply differences in game play you would be better off on saying that you miss things like the throne room or other things like that that are truly missing from the game and not a feature that was redesigned not removed.....

Well, first of all, it's just an example of lost functionality. Whether one likes it or not is another question. As for countering artillery, of course it would be a two-edged sword: Artillery from inside a city could bombard SoD's or other artillery while they were still two squares away. It's only my opinion, but such a result would go a long way toward balancing the enormous SoD's of Civ4 because you wouldn't have to wait until they're on your doorstep to bombard them. Of course, this very same concept, both offensively and defensively, is implemented with bombers, missiles and even, to some extent, paratroopers. Why not with artillery?

Just as in real-life battles, modern warfare would become more sophisticated in that you're compelled to add long-range bombing, missiles and artillery strikes in order to achieve your goals. Don't you feel that, once bombers come along, artillery becomes less and less useful, at least until it's mobile? Also, why do you think the AI is so fond of hitting your troops with missiles? It's because, in the absence of ranged artillery, missiles are the next best thing.

Question for those lobbying for "ranged bombardment": You have no problem with scale? A standard map is 84 plots wide, therefore each plot is roughly the equivalent of 300 miles across. No modern Artillery piece has that kind of range, and you want to give it to catapults (I've heard some argue for archery units, too)?

The 2 plot range of Civ III Artillery was. . . .

Well, first of all, it's just an example of lost functionality. Whether one likes it or not is another question. As for countering artillery, of course it would be a two-edged sword: Artillery from inside a city could bombard SoD's or other artillery while they were still two squares away. It's only my opinion, but such a result would go a long way toward balancing the enormous SoD's of Civ4 because you wouldn't have to wait until they're on your doorstep to bombard them. Of course, this very same concept, both offensively and defensively, is implemented with bombers, missiles and even, to some extent, paratroopers. Why not with artillery?


Um the problem with this in a turn based game is that the person defending will always get an extra turn to do this based on this model, the only way this works is if you add in a % chance for couter batery fire like they did with bombing and air interception.

IE the two square bombardment feature was broken as is so it is as Bhuric is saying a fix to remove it, not a loss of a feature.

As I said you would win more points with your argument by focusing on working features that were removed.

Ok, you seem to be misunderstanding what I'm saying. You're saying rather than fixing it, they dropped it. I'm saying dropping it is fixing it. I don't care how it works in real life. Civ IV is not a real life simulator. If something from real life breaks game balance, it should be thrown out to preserve game balance. Such is the case here.

Sorry, but fixing it is fixing it and dropping it is not. If, as you say, it "breaks game balance," dropping it is not the only alternative. It can also be fixed. You, more than anyone, should understand the concept of fixing things which throw off game balance because you've done a terrific job of fixing such things in your patch. For example, one of the things you fixed was: "AIs less likely to build Executives if they can't afford to use them or already have sufficient." AI's spamming Executives threw the game out of whack. Yet, in your patch, you didn't drop Executives, you fixed them.

Er, yes. But you are trying to say the former, while I (and others) are saying the latter. And the two have completely different meanings when it comes to the point you are trying to make. If they consciously made a choice not to implement something, then it's a game design issue, and not one of insufficient time/resources.

Bh

That's a fair point. I can't remember where I saw it, but Soren has gone on record as saying something to the effect that he couldn't include everything he wanted because of time and resource restraints. Not every feature left out of a game is a design decision. In the case of feature which arguably enhance the game, it's often a matter of lack of time and resources, not a design decision.

I suppose the question for our discussion is, if they keep the Civ4 engine for Civ5, it is reasonable to expect and ask them to "bring back" some of the "lost" features. Since they now have a good engine foundation, the limited programming resources could be devoted to adding more functionality.

Of course, we might run into problems with the game becoming bigger and bigger and unable to run except on better PCs. Of course, if Civ5 comes out in 2009, it is reasonable to expect a better minimum system requirement of the consumer base.

Wodan
I hope they just stick with this engine for a couple sequels honestly. I am aware they will not go back to 2D and I am fine with that. (Although I think the switchover was a tad premature) Once a title goes from 2D to 3D, thats how it remains, and rightfully so IMO. I just hope they don't decide they need to upgrade engines for every sequel because "it'll be way cool." Graphics are not what this game is about. Graphics are not what any game should ever be about. That's what screensavers are for. And if graphics are your thing, I can suggest MANY games that beat the crap out of civ 4.

Hopefully, they stay on this plateau for a while. In the coming years, the reqs will seem relatively low. They can pull from the new system ideas they liked from previous incarnations and expand on the idea so they arent "reinventing the wheel" every sequel.

Question for those lobbying for "ranged bombardment": You have no problem with scale? A standard map is 84 plots wide, therefore each plot is roughly the equivalent of 300 miles across. No modern Artillery piece has that kind of range, and you want to give it to catapults (I've heard some argue for archery units, too)?

The 2 plot range of Civ III Artillery was. . . .
What about a huge map? I believe that shrinks it down a bit. I don't know nor care for the math formula though myself. Just saying I am curious as to the amount of land in a tile on a huge map. You have a valid point.

Although, I like the idea of ranged bombardment. I have always like the idea of having a catapult, trebuchet, and cannon all have a bombard range of 1. Meaning bombarding damage to any adjacent tile. Collateral damage would still be there, but only in a very low % chance of it happening. Like say 5-10% chance it may cause collateral damage. Catapult could cause up to 2 additional units to recieve like .5 damage. Teb 1 damage to up to 3 units. Cannon 1.5 damage up to 5 units. There could be promotions that add to a % for collateral damage to take place but none to increase the damage itself.

As for the counter to this, if there are artillery in the targeted square, they fire back with the exact same results. Possibility to do collateral damage that is. In addition, cavalry units can be set on a new command much like aircraft's "intercept" command provided they have the proper promotion for that. (They can't do this if they do not have the promotion which should be available at level 3 or 4 IMO) But basically if they have said promotion they are on "patrol" and can flank the enemy and when the attacking artillery bombard, they have a chance to intercept before any damage takes place. Which would destroy the attacking artillery unit. But these cavalry units could only flank once per turn. So if attacking artillery outnumber your patrolling cavalry you can continue to bombard without worry. Unless they have artillery in the city as well. As I would say a defending artillery should be able to fire back every time and not be "spent" after 1 defence shot. So 1 artillery could fire 20 times in defense if 20 artillerys are at the gate.

I don't know some of that would probably be hard to code. Actually I bet alot of it would. And the ideas could be way more simplified most likely. And there may be a hole in it as well. But that is more like an amalgam(sp?) of ideas I have sen on here in various places. But it sounds good. :p

Um the problem with this in a turn based game is that the person defending will always get an extra turn to do this based on this model, the only way this works is if you add in a % chance for couter batery fire like they did with bombing and air interception.

IE the two square bombardment feature was broken as is so it is as Bhuric is saying a fix to remove it, not a loss of a feature.

As I said you would win more points with your argument by focusing on working features that were removed.

Thanks for the advice. For the record, though, I'm not trying to "win points." I'm merely expressing my opinion. Since you have given me good advice, I'll return the favor: Your posts would be more coherent if you used proper spelling and grammar:

I like that you cannot bombard from two squares away The only way I would like to see that implimented at all would be iff you could have couter battery artilery fire from the target damage your stack from two squars away as well.....

Sorry, but fixing it is fixing it and dropping it is not. If, as you say, it "breaks game balance," dropping it is not the only alternative. It can also be fixed.

It depends on your definition of "fixed". It's not like they dropped artillery completely, they just removed the ability to bombard squares without suffering counter-attacks. You can still build them, and you can still bombard with them. That, to me, is a "fix" of the game imbalance.

Yet, in your patch, you didn't drop Executives, you fixed them.

I'm not sure you can make a valid comparison between a game bug and a game feature.

That's a fair point. I can't remember where I saw it, but Soren has gone on record as saying something to the effect that he couldn't include everything he wanted because of time and resource restraints. Not every feature left out of a game is a design decision. In the case of feature which arguably enhance the game, it's often a matter of lack of time and resources, not a design decision.

Well, yes, I think that's true of almost any game, and any game developer. I can't think of a single project that I've done where I haven't thought of other stuff I'd have loved to put in, if I simply had the time/resources to do so. So yes, I'm sure he said something like that. But I'd be very surprised if he hadn't said something identical if they had have gone with a simpler graphical engine.

I won't deny that they likely spent some more time on the engine that could have been spent in other areas. But consider that they were already fairly familiar with the engine thanks to the work on Pirates. Also keep in mind that a lot of the graphical work is done by artists who wouldn't have the ability to help with non-art related areas of the project. So I don't think the graphical engine had quite as much an impact on the design process as you are imagining.

Bh

It depends on your definition of "fixed". It's not like they dropped artillery completely, they just removed the ability to bombard squares without suffering counter-attacks. You can still build them, and you can still bombard with them. That, to me, is a "fix" of the game imbalance.

I'm not sure you can make a valid comparison between a game bug and a game feature.

Bh

At the end of the day, I think we're down to quibbling over semantics.

My original point was that there were certain features in Civ3 (e.g., ranged artillery or the ability to find any city by using the SHIFT+L command) which I would have liked to have seen implemented in Civ4. Ranged artillery in Civ3 was not a bug and allowing the AI in BtS to build as many Executives as it wanted was not a bug. Both were conscious game design features. How they played may have had unintended consequences in terms of game balance, but they were still intended design features. In the same way that you were able to keep the design feature of Executives by mitigating the unintended game balance problem, I would have preferred that Firaxis keep features such as ranged artillery while mitigating any game imbalance issues they may have caused. Similarly, features such as being able to locate cities anywhere on the map without having to search the whole world were not bugs which needed fixing. They were merely conveniences which were not implemented in Civ4. As I said before, other functionality was introduced in Civ4. It simply would have been preferable, in my view, to build upon functionality, rather than substituting one for another. You and others may not have liked or cared about such features and/or conveniences in Civ3. But I did and do.

I won't deny that they likely spent some more time on the engine that could have been spent in other areas. But consider that they were already fairly familiar with the engine thanks to the work on Pirates. Also keep in mind that a lot of the graphical work is done by artists who wouldn't have the ability to help with non-art related areas of the project. So I don't think the graphical engine had quite as much an impact on the design process as you are imagining.
This brought to my mind a point that I haven't seen made yet, in fact I have seen the reverse wrongly-implied.
I was talking about this very subject yesterday, with a friend of mine who is a game producer at EA. Apparently it is a lot easier and way less time-consuming for a professional graphics artist to create moving graphics for a 3d engine than for 2d. This is one reason so few games use 2d now, it is not only that 3d looks better to most of the target audience it is also less expensive, leaving more, not less, budget for the programmers who will work on the actual gameplay. (Of course many games choose to spend the savings on yet more graphics, but I simply don't see evidence of that in Civ4, the graphics although 3d are far from incredibly detailed!)

I understand your point, and can agree with it to a certain degree. While I don't miss ranged artillery, I won't argue with those who do. My main point of contention is with the idea that ranged bombardment isn't in the game simply because of a lack of time/resources. I don't think that was the reason, I think it was a conscious choice. You can disagree with that choice, but I don't know that you can successfully argue that it's a result of neglect.

Bh

I agree civ3 artillery didn't seem right on the grand scale of war. It's not like you can capture an whole army to use that army to fight against their own country like you can civ3 artillery pieces. All the other games on the strategic level I've played don't have armies with artillery support greater range than normal armies. Civ3 artillery would make more sense if Civilization included tactical battles.

Gentlemen, gentlemen! Enough of this petty bickering over ranged artillery!

The real criminal act of omission committed in the transfer of game features between Civ3 and Civ4 involves my beloved tourism gold bonus for Wonders over 1000 years in age.

:hammers: + Wonders = :gold:
Industrious FTW!! :thumbsup:

I agree civ3 artillery didn't seem right on the grand scale of war. It's not like you can capture an whole army to use that army to fight against their own country like you can civ3 artillery pieces. All the other games on the strategic level I've played don't have armies with artillery support greater range than normal armies. Civ3 artillery would make more sense if Civilization included tactical battles.

Don't get us all started on tactical battles now. I would LOVE that to come in. :D :p

Thanks for the advice. For the record, though, I'm not trying to "win points." I'm merely expressing my opinion. Since you have given me good advice, I'll return the favor: Your posts would be more coherent if you used proper spelling and grammar:

Perhaps they would but that would actualy imply that I cared about that in the first place, which quite frankly on an internet message board I really don't as I have a few minutes here and there to dash something out...

Perhaps next time instead of just telling me I spell poorly perhaps you could actulay address the discussion, but alas on a internet discusion board that is as hard to find as good spelling and grammar....

Really out to be an extension to goodwins law that covers spelling and grammar whines as well. :rolleyes:

I was actualy pointing out that there are features that were real features that were left out, that do support your supposed real argument that they put more time into the graphics at the expense of game play.
, but i guess you were more interested in continuing to say that Firaxis as a development house sucks since they did not add in your pet broken feature from an older version of the game into a newer version of the game.
That is the substance of what your opinion seems to be, and as always you are well an truly entitled to it.:confused:

That said enjoy your dislike of the game I won't try to change it any longer, with rational discusion.

Again guys, please do not go off-topic too much otherwise it may seem a try to bump the thread in a wrong way.

I think the Firaxians already grabbed the message, it's up to them now decide to dialog with customers or not....and it's up to us to judge this behaviour ....despiting CIV IV is now a good game indeed, mainly because of Bhruic and friends.

cheers

Exactly. Rather than spending the time and resources to make it right, they simply dropped it.

Ah, the old "say 'exactly', and then say something completely different" trick to try to fool people into thinking I agree with you... You are banging away with your false assumption that "with time they could have made ranged artillery work"; meanwhile countless people have explained to you why it would be an inappropriate mechanic for Civ4, why artillery should have to risk itself in battle, and why (we presume) Soren decided ranged artillery should be dropped rather than shoved into a game where it is an inappropriate mechanic.

(we presume)

Indeed. You presume too much.

As far as I can tell, BtS Airships work much like ranged "safe" artillery.

And we all know how much that sucks.

What I really want to know is if we can expect further Firaxis work on Civ IV and its expansions.

Or have they now taken their hand from the game (i.e. no further patches)?

That would be a shame. Sure I can fix my pet peeve problem myself, but I really prefer an official patch, so everyone uses the same version, everyone talks about the same thing in the forums, etc...

What I really want to know is if we can expect further Firaxis work on Civ IV and its expansions.

Or have they now taken their hand from the game (i.e. no further patches)?

That would be a shame. Sure I can fix my pet peeve problem myself, but I really prefer an official patch, so everyone uses the same version, everyone talks about the same thing in the forums, etc...

Nobody knows. Firaxis has not said word one in either direction. Everything you (may) have read on this and other threads about any potential new patch (or lack of patch for that matter) is pure speculation.

I think that they are doing a patch..... because alexman is still coming here now and then to check the bugs subforum.... he simply does not post anything ( I wonder why :rolleyes: ) . If they did dropped the ball, why would a firaxis programmer to check a forum for posted bugs?

One thing we should realize is that official testers are probably required to have a legal purchased copy. Cracked copies, by definition, are not tested, and should rightfully not receive any company support in tracking bugs / problems.

Now, it's a valid point that people who use a cracked copy may cause customer service issues, either by publicly blaming it on the company, or whatever.

There's no easy answer. Not from the company's viewpoint, not from "legitimate" customer's viewpoints, and not from cracked-copy users viewpoints.

Wodan

Apologies if this is slightly off topic, but this was brought up in this thread. Is it the opinion of this board that the only OOS bugs are due to cracks/mods?

I own 2 legal copies of Civ 4 and have them installed on 2 computers. They are not cracked. I don't have installed any mod's and have never installed any mod's since I uninstalled/reinstalled everything for BTS. I get the OOS error immedately.

Is anybody playing Civ 4 BTS 3.13 multiplayer successfully? If so, how did you make it work?

Apologies if this is slightly off topic, but this was brought up in this thread. Is it the opinion of this board that the only OOS bugs are due to cracks/mods?

No, the current consensus for the OOS "bug":

1) Delete your Civ IV cache files (C:\Documents and Settings\<your username>\Local Settings\Application Data\My Games\Beyond the Sword\cache).
2) Turn off random events.

Only do (2) if (1) doesn't work.

Bh

This has fallen to page 3, meaning we've all accepted that Firaxis has screwed us and won't be fixing any of their errors, just leaving it to Bhruic.

That's tragic. It's amazing how far a once-mighty franchise has fallen.

This has fallen to page 3, meaning we've all accepted that Firaxis has screwed us and won't be fixing any of their errors, just leaving it to Bhruic.

But after your post it's on page 1 again so obviously not after all... :p

This has fallen to page 3, meaning we've all accepted that Firaxis has screwed us and won't be fixing any of their errors, just leaving it to Bhruic.

That's tragic. It's amazing how far a once-mighty franchise has fallen.

Or maybe it is just that no one has anything more constructive to say. Rehashing old arguments is getting old...

Their lame 'copy protection' fails on my super-reliable system which happens to have SCSI drives, and I am not allowed to play my game legally despite buying every Civ game since #1.

Whether that is Firaxis's problem or Take2's problem, I simply don't care. They've worked together to produce a faulty product. These companies shall never again receive one cent from me.

well, the new football manager is out. so is pro evo 2008. no need to play civ anymore... well... maybe.

Or maybe it is just that no one has anything more constructive to say. Rehashing old arguments is getting old...

Which honestly is kind of sad.

Take2/Firaxis gets no more of my money since they've now proven that abandoning their products when they hit "good enough" is their standard operating procedure.

Can i just ask then, is the messed up animation on battles due to xp or my graphics card (which works fine with everything and worked fine before the expansion) or just crappy programming?

Thanks for the reply :D

FatSean: did you call customer service?
Dominico: sounds like you're running v.3.03. If so, upgrade to 3.13.

Wodan

Their lame 'copy protection' fails on my super-reliable system which happens to have SCSI drives, and I am not allowed to play my game legally despite buying every Civ game since #1.

Whether that is Firaxis's problem or Take2's problem, I simply don't care. They've worked together to produce a faulty product. These companies shall never again receive one cent from me.

Time to go a 'Securom' hunting! .:ar15:
This pest is hiding in the registry. Run: Regedit/ try looking in software compartments under 'current user' and 'local machine' and root out any 'Securom' thats seen.

Firaxis is comman user in games like Railroads to Civ ptw-bts. It can cause complications in reinstall and off the hop if your previous games were carriers

Can i just ask then, is the messed up animation on battles due to xp or my graphics card (which works fine with everything and worked fine before the expansion) or just crappy programming?

Thanks for the reply :D

It's definitely crappy programming, but the question is from which source :). If you're running 3.03, then it's Firaxis' fault. Otherwise it's probably Microsoft or your graphics card manufacturer.

I mourn the death of Civ today. It is dead to me now. Nearly four weeks after releasing a patch with game breaking bugs, there is still no word on a patch. I sent their customer service a one sentence question politely asking them if there would be any further patches. As expected they never replied, which is no big deal as I expect that from them now. But Vassalage is STILL a broken concept and the AI is dumber now than in Vanilla.. etc!

When did you send them your question, White Elk?

Wodan

I mourn the death of Civ today. It is dead to me now. Nearly four weeks after releasing a patch with game breaking bugs, there is still no word on a patch. I sent their customer service a one sentence question politely asking them if there would be any further patches. As expected they never replied, which is no big deal as I expect that from them now. But Vassalage is STILL a broken concept and the AI is dumber now than in Vanilla.. etc!

Use Bhruic's patch. Its fantastic and I love Vassalage now.

I mourn the death of Civ today. It is dead to me now. Nearly four weeks after releasing a patch with game breaking bugs, there is still no word on a patch. I sent their customer service a one sentence question politely asking them if there would be any further patches. As expected they never replied, which is no big deal as I expect that from them now. But Vassalage is STILL a broken concept and the AI is dumber now than in Vanilla.. etc!

WHite ELk, from that other forum? Your the one who gave me these great forest ghx right?

YEs I remember you. :) Sad to hear you civ days are done. Hey you tried civ3's NEW MEM 2 vassel system? (copyright-or not, Embyodead 2007)
Mybe try that before you give up on fun. Or not. Im not sellin Im thankinful and want to pay back best way I know right now, also know Anno2 is complete with Ares 2007 terrain ;)

I mourn the death of Civ today. It is dead to me now. Nearly four weeks after releasing a patch with game breaking bugs, there is still no word on a patch. I sent their customer service a one sentence question politely asking them if there would be any further patches. As expected they never replied, which is no big deal as I expect that from them now. But Vassalage is STILL a broken concept and the AI is dumber now than in Vanilla.. etc!

I also sent a question a few weeks ago asking how to fix the oos problems from 3.13 or if they were going to release another patch. They did reply after a few days but only by asking if I could give them a screenshot. Do they not know what oos errors are?

I also sent a question a few weeks ago asking how to fix the oos problems from 3.13 or if they were going to release another patch. They did reply after a few days but only by asking if I could give them a screenshot. Do they not know what oos errors are?

Reply was probably sent by the same genius in charge of the testing team :lol:

User mods can't fix the multiplayer out of sync issues or the fact that Firaxis introduced different version issues for Warlords and Vanilla with this patch.
Actually they can. Check out the Master of Orion 3 forums to see what Bhruic has done there.

To help everyone understand the patching process better, I have posted a thread title "The Process of a Patch (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=6111417#post6111417)" in the General forums. I'm hoping this helps explain why a patch takes as long as it does. Enjoy!

To help everyone understand the patching process better, I have posted a thread title "The Process of a Patch (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=6111417#post6111417)" in the General forums. I'm hoping this helps explain why a patch takes as long as it does. Enjoy!

Not to be negative, but while your post is a good thing for noobs to know about the process, this thread is mainly about the fact that Firaxis hasn't even said they'll be fixing the errors they created in 3.13

All most of us want from Firaxis right now is for them to say, "Yes, there will be another patch eventually."

Then we'd be content with the world... for a while ;)

Not to be negative, but while your post is a good thing for noobs to know about the process, this thread is mainly about the fact that Firaxis hasn't even said they'll be fixing the errors they created in 3.13

True, but a lot of the arguments in this thread dealt with the extended time period of the patch and why we haven't seen or heard of another one. I was hoping this might explain some of that.

Makes sense.

Alot of people do seem to think that Firaxis should just knock out a patch on a thursday afternoon that will fix the bugs from 3.13

You're like good friends with them. You should convince them to post a note saying they'll be making 1 more patch with ONLY bug fixes. Then we could lock this thread and start one called "Whining Because The Patch Is Taking So Long", which would at least be fun :D

There will be another patch at some point, but it's going to be a little while, so hopefully you guys can be patient. :)

Jon

There will be another patch at some point, but it's going to be a little while, so hopefully you guys can be patient. :)

Jon

Thanks much for the heads up.

There will be another patch at some point, but it's going to be a little while, so hopefully you guys can be patient. :)

Jon


Are you really a Firaxian ?

Well, if so, this is just what I was waiting for and I thank you very much for your post that witnesses you are still caring about customers :thumbsup:

Please 2 things :

1 ) Every now and then please make a short post lkike this just to chat a bit with your fans

2 ) Take into deep consideration what the golden boy ( aka Bhruic ) did


Thanks a lot in advance


P.S. beeing you aged 22 are you for real the lead Designer ?

Snoopy on Apolyton also confirmed that there would be another patch.

Wodan

There will be another patch at some point, but it's going to be a little while, so hopefully you guys can be patient. :)

Jon

Great news, thanks! :D

There will be another patch at some point, but it's going to be a little while, so hopefully you guys can be patient. :)

Jon

Awesome, thanks for letting us know. I think Bhruic and the BUG/BAT mod team will keep us satisfied in the meantime. I truly appreciate the moddability in Civ4 that makes this possible!

Are you really a Firaxian ?

Well, if so, this is just what I was waiting for and I thank you very much for your post that witnesses you are still caring about customers :thumbsup:

Please 2 things :

1 ) Every now and then please make a short post lkike this just to chat a bit with your fans
Well, I try to poke in here when I can. As Alex said before, we've posted here because we care about Civ and the community, because we're fans ourselves. There's a lot of things we're responsible for here at Firaxis, and posting here isn't among them. The opportunities we get are based on when we can spare the minute/brainpower. ;) I used to post here a lot more (as evidenced by my post count of nearly 2000 :eek:), but it's a lot harder to find the time these days. Plus we can't just talk about whatever is going on freely, as much as we might want to. :)

2 ) Take into deep consideration what the golden boy ( aka Bhruic ) did

Thanks a lot in advance
We are definitely appreciative for the work Bhruic has done. Because of the way things work at a big company, we can't release patches very often, so his work to improve BTS helps both us and you guys out there. I wish it were possible to put stuff out more often, but that's not always how it goes.

P.S. beeing you aged 22 are you for real the lead Designer ?
Alex and I were both designers for BTS, and yes, I'm actually 22. ;)

Jon

Well, I try to poke in here when I can. As Alex said before, we've posted here because we care about Civ and the community, because we're fans ourselves. There's a lot of things we're responsible for here at Firaxis, and posting here isn't among them. The opportunities we get are based on when we can spare the minute/brainpower. ;) I used to post here a lot more (as evidenced by my post count of nearly 2000 :eek:), but it's a lot harder to find the time these days. Plus we can't just talk about whatever is going on freely, as much as we might want to. :)


We are definitely appreciative for the work Bhruic has done. Because of the way things work at a big company, we can't release patches very often, so his work to improve BTS helps both us and you guys out there. I wish it were possible to put stuff out more often, but that's not always how it goes.


Alex and I were both designers for BTS, and yes, I'm actually 22. ;)

Jon

whatever you do, DO NOT POST A TIME FRAME! it will just make people even more mad if and when you dont hit it.

whatever you do, DO NOT POST A TIME FRAME! it will just make people even more mad if and when you dont hit it.
Well, I guess it's a good thing I have no idea when it's going to be released then. ;)

Jon

I believe that this thread has no reason anymore.... Thanks Jon Shafer :goodjob:

P.S Nice avatar ;)

Being 22 means you've probably been doing this for 6 or 8 years, which in other fields (like Accounting) would correspond to 28-30 yrs.

So, in "dog years", that seems right in line. :D

Wodan

We are definitely appreciative for the work Bhruic has done. Because of the way things work at a big company, we can't release patches very often, so his work to improve BTS helps both us and you guys out there.

Does that mean I'll be getting a salary? ;)

Bh

Thanks for dropping in and telling us, Jon. I'm happy to learn there'll be another patch.

Does that mean I'll be getting a salary? ;)

Bh
Haha, by us I mean Firaxis and the fan community... sorry. ;)

Jon

Bh, hit him up for "work for hire" before a full time salary. ;)

Wodan

Damn, you're right. I got so carried away with the "working for them" part that I just assumed it was a full-time position.

Hmm, if I'm "work for hire", do I get benefits? Dental?

At the very least I should get my name in the manual. Althought, really, who reads those things anyway? ;)

Bh

Damn, you're right. I got so carried away with the "working for them" part that I just assumed it was a full-time position.

Hmm, if I'm "work for hire", do I get benefits? Dental?

At the very least I should get my name in the manual. Althought, really, who reads those things anyway? ;)

Bh

You have to wait a few days or so but when I become emperor of the world, I shall give you a small country as thanks for your efforts.

Damn, you're right. I got so carried away with the "working for them" part that I just assumed it was a full-time position.

Hmm, if I'm "work for hire", do I get benefits? Dental?
No. (and I use the same inflection Mako used when talking to Conan.)

But you get paid, and you get to add it to your resume. ;)

Wodan

What? No dental??

Ok, that's it, I'm going on strike! Until they give me a percentage of dvd and online sales, I refuse to write anymore. Uh, write any more code...

Ok, I might be getting my strikes confused. :p

Bh

I believe that this thread has no reason anymore.... Thanks Jon Shafer :goodjob:

P.S Nice avatar ;)

Haha... one month after the thread is made.


Not enough time to post... that sounds like a highly structured company.


Good to hear that a patch is coming at some point in the future - hopefully this game won't be left in a condition similar to civ3 "complete" (that one caused me to delay purchase of civ4 and infinitely delayed the purchase of pirates and railroads).

Best of luck on the patch!

No dental with work-for-hire. But you should be pushing for PTO and major medical anyway. Dental is small potatoes. ;)

Wodan

Don't ask for PTO in the games industry. They'll give it to you, but you won't be able to find the time to take it.

No dental with work-for-hire. But you should be pushing for PTO and major medical anyway. Dental is small potatoes.

I live in Canada, land of socialized medicine. :D My medical is already covered but dentistry isn't, and it's freakin' expensive.

Anyway, we've probably de-railed the thread sufficiently, not that there's much left "on topic" to talk about.

Bh

Thanks Jon for bridging the gap and letting us know that BTS won't be dropped like C3C and Warlords was. Maybe by the time the patch is finally released I will give BTS and Civ a third chance... maybe not.

Ever since Atari and then 2K came along, I have wished that Firaxis could become independent. I understand that these big companies slow down the patch process and interfere with the quality of the game. But I don't buy that it needs to be this way. And in this case I think that the Firaxian relationship with 2K is a case of diminishing returns. These companies are destroying the Civ franchise IMHO.

I live in Canada, land of socialized medicine. :D


Well, you'll still need the insurance to come down here and get treated when they put you on the waiting list.... :lol:

There will be another patch at some point, but it's going to be a little while, so hopefully you guys can be patient. :)

Jon

Excellent! Thank you. :)

There will be another patch at some point, but it's going to be a little while, so hopefully you guys can be patient. :)

Jon

Are you also gong to patch up the previous versions of Civ4? I think that was the most annoying thing about the patch is that it changed things on both vanilla and Warlords and yet there were changes made to them. It would have been nice to have made warning about this when the patch was released so that people in the situation where it would affect them, they could make changes to protect them from those changes.

Firaxis is fracked. Whether by their own doing or by their relationship with 2K games. Whatever the cause they are screwed. Don't trust in them for the future of Civ4 or you will be disappointed. They are done like an overfried tritip.

Firaxis is fracked. Whether by their own doing or by their relationship with 2K games. Whatever the cause they are screwed. Don't trust in them for the future of Civ4 or you will be disappointed. They are done like an overfried tritip.

:crazyeye: :lol:

I think it true. Firaxis has earned my disrespect for now. I just wish I knew if it was all their doing or 2K. Either way they sold out and they pay the piper.

WHite ELk, from that other forum? Your the one who gave me these great forest ghx right?

YEs I remember you. :) Sad to hear you civ days are done. Hey you tried civ3's NEW MEM 2 vassel system? (copyright-or not, Embyodead 2007)
Mybe try that before you give up on fun. Or not. Im not sellin Im thankinful and want to pay back best way I know right now, also know Anno2 is complete with Ares 2007 terrain ;)Hehe HEYA T.A. Jones!!! Long time no chat. Sorry I missed your post here. Man i miss those days of easy terrain and unit upgrades! It was so nice to just drag and drop them! No programing knowledge needed, just drag and drop ease. Ahh the good ole days. And I never had to worry about losing out on a game due to the frackin BS MAF!!!!!!! And everything ran so blessed smooth. No trees blowing in the wind and no stupid birds flying out of trees to screw things up. Man I do miss elements of Civ3. It was so basic. Not so much as Civ2 but far far more than Civ4. I think Civ4 screwed the pooch though I was one to try and make Civ4 look better than it was. But in the end it is a piece of sh**. We gained nothing but lost much. Perhaps I should check back into the Civ3 and the new mods. Civ4 is crap as far as I am concerned. I can more easilly deal with Civ3 AI city spamming and artillery overkill than I can deal with the dumbfrack Civ4 AI etc.

Thanks T.A for the push to try out the new Civ3 mods. Civ4 has even nearely
ruined the great mod of FfH for me. But I think they can work past the BTS BS.

When did you send them your question, White Elk?

WodanIt was within a reasonable timeframe.
I have still had NO response so they have well entered the UNreasonable timeframe.

Nice to hear from a Firaxian. It would be nicer if it was an "official" announcement, but I'll take what I can get.

The thing about an unofficial response is that it can be pure BS and there is no repercussions for it. Alexman unofficially told us a patch was coming soon but that turned out to be false and the eventual patch was bogus. Now Jon Shafer unofficially says a patch will come but not for some time. WTF does it matter what they say? I do appreciate that they have something to say for a number of reasons. But with unofficial speak what the frack does it matter. Anything can be said unofficial like. Should we be sheep placated by a lions diatribe? WTF!?! Alexman gave us shite for taking his words to heart. And now Jon comes along with less committal words and we are to take these as words of truth and pacification?

The 3.13 patch did not only NOT fix BTS but it broke it further. And not only that but BTS was to be a fix for the unfixed Warlords and they even fracked that up. firaxis is fracked and I dont have much faith that they will recover. I now assume that I purchased a piece of sh*t which will never be righted. So be it.

Hunh. I've had quite a lot of fun playing with 3.13 and Bhruic's patch. I purchased a quality product that I enjoy quite a bit and have been well repaid many times over... by far this is a better value than most any other form of entertainment I partake in, from TV to movies and even to frisbee golf (which is nominally free but you still have to buy the discs).

Wodan

From my own perspective, I'm happy with BtS. Firaxis was responsible for making it moddable enough so that someone like Bhruic could fix most of their bugs. So you gotta give 'em some credit. But from the perspective of someone who's not a regular in these forums, or a computer newbie uncomfortable with unofficial patches, then yeah, I agree that Firaxis really dropped the ball. Without Bhruic's unofficial patch, and given the low quality of Firaxis/Take2 tech support, those folks are left stranded with a broken game.

Hunh. I've had quite a lot of fun playing with 3.13 and Bhruic's patch. I purchased a quality product that I enjoy quite a bit and have been well repaid many times over... by far this is a better value than most any other form of entertainment I partake in, from TV to movies and even to frisbee golf (which is nominally free but you still have to buy the discs).

Wodan

Try books sometime. Reading can be quite enjoyable. And I have yet to open a book and start reading, and just when I'm immersed in the story the pages go blue and then it says: "FZZT!" and the pages wink out and I learn that I can't read that book anymore until a book technician has repaired it. I've never had to contact a publisher and ask them when they are going to publish a patch for "Pride and Prejudice" or "The Tin Drum."

Actually I read all the time. My wife complains about it. :lol:

Wodan

ps and Yes, I spot logical fallacies all the time. With a book, we KNOW the author can't issue a "patch". So, we gloss over that sort of thing, either consciously or subconsciously.

I just wish I knew if it was all their doing or 2K. Either way they sold out.

Well, since Firaxis is completely owned by 2K, I guess they did sell out. Literally.
:lol:

Geez. Anybody who is employed has sold out. Get over yourself. :)

Wodan

And I have yet to open a book and start reading, and just when I'm immersed in the story the pages go blue and then it says: "FZZT!" and the pages wink out and I learn that I can't read that book anymore

I have, I think three times, had the experience of reading a book only to find that a signature has been repeated (and another omitted.) Orders of magnitude different from how often there are problems with electronic media, but it can happen.

Actually I read all the time. My wife complains about it. :lol:

Does she suggest you play a nice computer game instead?

Your talk about how you "spot logical fallacies all the time" is disingenuous. Nobody would accept that a book was issued in such a crappy shape as many computer games are. If you don't like the author's "logic", that's another kettle of fish.

P. S. I'm very grateful to Jon Shafer for posting the information that a patch will be upmcoming at some time, but I think it's too bad of Take 2/Firaxis not to supply information of that kind on their official websites. And they don't reply to mails with such questions.

From my own perspective, I'm happy with BtS. Firaxis was responsible for making it moddable enough so that someone like Bhruic could fix most of their bugs. So you gotta give 'em some credit. But from the perspective of someone who's not a regular in these forums, or a computer newbie uncomfortable with unofficial patches, then yeah, I agree that Firaxis really dropped the ball. Without Bhruic's unofficial patch, and given the low quality of Firaxis/Take2 tech support, those folks are left stranded with a broken game.
(Marking by me)

Being an old critic of Firaxis, first I have to say that I appreciate the announcement of another patch to come. I can even accept that they don't give any time estimate right now.

What I am still unsatisfied with is the poor quality of their patches.
Meanwhile, there is in addition some disappointment about the way in which they perform their communication with a quite active fanbase, which is also poor, to say the least.
Therefore, I take it as an effort to improve that Jon Shafer gave us a tiny bit of information.

Now to the statement above:
I always thought that the moddability of Civ4 was both, good for the modding community AND good for marketing, as they can always "duck and cover" behind this.
Taking into account that 3.02 was heavily patched by the community (Solver) , 3.03 having been a piece of sh*t which they just left available, even after the problems were known and 3.13 once again a subject to heavy improvements (and again, those were needed, man!), one could take the Firaxis' approach as statement of disrespect for the paying customer.

Therefore, I do not think that we as people who actually have paid their salaries have any need to express thankfulness.
They have issued a game which admittedly is fun to play and we did pay for it. The patching history of them is poor, to say the least. Even more annoying, they have not improved in this area since the times of C3C.

But once again, let's take Jon Shafer's statement as a shy attempt to improve and hope for the best. As now there is no immediate need to release another "quick" :rolleyes: patch, they have every chance to improve their score.

It will be up to them what they are going to do with that chance.

Can I suggest that admin please lock / close this thread, otherwise it's just going to get dug up and refreshed over and over again by the same people - thanks.

Regards - Mr P

What I cannot take from any Firaxian is the words:

we have no time to peek in here often at CFC

Man, It takes ca. 10 mins to make a post - maybe less (5? 3?).

I understand though, we all say small lies in life... ;)

The most easiest is to say "I have no time"...
It is so common we don't even consider it as a lie...
Instead we translate it: "I don't want to do it", "It is not important"...

What my hope is that this might change and for Firaxis
it will be IMPORTANT, they will WANT TO do it - to get into contact with the fans

With all this said, I welcome Jon appearing here :)

And so the bashings start again ... you know, I can totally understand why the Firaxians would prefer not interacting with their "fans" here anymore.

And so the bashings start again ... you know, I can totally understand why the Firaxians would prefer not interacting with their "fans" here anymore.

I'm sure that would be a lot easier for them if their patches were of some kind of quality instead of crippleware :)

where was I bashing? :)

I'm sure that would be a lot easier for them if their patches were of some kind of quality instead of crippleware :)

I wouldn't call the patches crippleware. I suspect that a lot of people don't even notice the bugs left.
I'm actually quite happy with the current state of the game (3.13 + bhruic).

In any case, the quality of the patches and some Firaxians posting here (in an inofficial capacity and on their free time) are separate issues to me.

where was I bashing? :)

Well, as I read it, you called Jon Shafer a liar and insinuated that he didn't post because he doesn't think it's important or didn't want to do it. Maybe it's just me, but this seemed a little rude.

Imagine you're waiting for a colleague or a customer at the place where you're working to do a simple task for you, that you know will only take a few minutes. When you ask him about it after a few days, he says he hasn't found the time yet.
Would you then proceed to tell him: "I know this would only have taken you a few minutes, you just didn't want to do it."?

Obviously, it's not exactly the same situation, but I still think even on these boards some common courtesy is called for if you expect any sort of constructive communication.

Too bad that Firaxis/Take2 is still a null entity in terms of communication with the costumers.... Yeah, we had communications from Shaefer and alexman, but they are programmers and not PR ( and that sometimes showed... )... It is not their job to communicate with the costumers/fans saying anything. If they came here to give news , IMHO it was more because of their fan heart than anything else... The employer of Jon and of Alex is supposed to have a PR departement for that kind of stuff, but until now it is as good as if it didn't existed ( Just look as the CivIV.com site.... last Firaxis/Take2 update there is the annoucement of the 1.61 patch :( ).....

I'm not saying that I don't apreciate the effort of the Civ IV programmers that came here to give news ( thank you BTW :goodjob: ), but simply it isn't their job..... Why do Firaxis/Take 2 pays for a web page advertising Civ IV just to let it inactive for 2 years, when even a trainee could make a small weekly update? Or why does the tech support responds to all the undocumented requests of help with a " Post a screenie" even if we're talking about MAF or OOS ( showing that they didn't even read properly the complaint ) ? IMHO this is just bad PR and in today's world software companies can't live only of the " hear say" thing.....

Folks, its not up to the developers to do "official" releases about patches. Thats up to marketing and the executive types. They're more interested in hyping up new games, since a new game will make more money then a patch will.

Developers coming around here saying "we're working on a patch, but it may take a while" is probably all they're allowed to do.

Take it for what it is: a sign that the developers care about fans of the game. Getting mad at them for not posting more or in an "official" capacity is a lot like yelling at a cashier in a grocery store because they stopped carrying your favorite brand of cheese doodles: venting frustration at someone who can't do anything about it.

And as far as time goes... I work as a software developer. I'm not in games (thank god), but I have friends who are. Most likely they actually don't have time to read or post here very often. Game developers are severely overworked, and constantly get pushed to meet completely unrealistic schedules set by management.

When you get forced to work 90 hour weeks for a couple months, then have to release something you know wasn't done because marketing says so... then you can get back to me about having ten minutes to post on the forums.

I wouldn't call the patches crippleware. I suspect that a lot of people don't even notice the bugs left.
I'm actually quite happy with the current state of the game (3.13 + bhruic).

In any case, the quality of the patches and some Firaxians posting here (in an inofficial capacity and on their free time) are separate issues to me.Good, the fact that fan boys like you are still sluts for Civ does bode well for the future of the franchise. And I do still hope for a future for Civ. But unofficial postings mean absolutely nothing... nothing beyond the bravery and sincerity of those that have unofficially posted here on behalf of firaxis. But it means absolutely frackin nothing!!! There is no accountability here for unofficial postings by firaxian fanatics. They can freely say anything they feel here because none of it is backed up by their employer. We can respect them for what they do! But what they do with their unofficial announcements is absolutley nothing as relates to the fixing of this broken game. Their employer is trash who won't fix their game in a timely manner and doesn't bother to OFFICIALLY let their fan base know what the heck is going on with them. From their history and present, I and others can safely assume that despite what unofficial announcements that the few CivFanatic firaxians make, the company at large is happy to take our money and run. They think there are enough of you dumbstruck fanbois out there that they can get away with this garbage. I beg to differ, and beyond being pissed off by getting ripped off I am concerned for the future of a game franchise which used to produce the only game I ever needed to play!!


Those that don't notice the bugs that 3.13 left are probably those that Civ Revolutions caterers to. The fan patches to the firaxian frackups don't even begin to address the real problems with the game. They do fix some very obvious frackups but neither fan fixers have ever addressed the major root problems with the game. I give much respect for them for fixing some very big and obvious firaxian frack ups. But they have only dealt with the donkey manure that firaxis pawned on us. No work is done with the bonehead AI and no work is done to actually make the BTS features worthy of its existence. BTS was to fix the broken Warlords and not only did BTS fail in fixing Warlords but it failed in every aspect that was new in BTS. It is such garbage that I wonder how even the most clueless fanbois can argue otherwise!

Warned! - Flaming. The insults weren't needed.

Wow - that was constructive. :rolleyes:

The only reality that we all need to rememeber is that Firaxis has NO legal/contractual obligation to even patch the game once. Once you fork over your hard earned cash for the game - that ends the official relationship you have with them. Period.

Now - it makes good business sense to relase patches and fixes after release, but they don't have to do it. At least Firaxis is not like EA and is still releasing patches and supporting games once they are released.

We complain that we don't hear anything from them at all. Then we do. So how do we respond? We complain that it is not "official". Can we not just take the info that Jon has given us and at least be happy that there is indeed another patch on the way?

I agree with the previous poster that this thread can only devolve into nothingness like the last few. It is time for it to be closed before it becomes a total flame/troll war.

I wouldn't call the patches crippleware. I suspect that a lot of people don't even notice the bugs left.
I'm actually quite happy with the current state of the game (3.13 + bhruic).Yeah +bhruic or solver is the problem ain't it? They rapidly fixed obvious firaxian frack ups in a matter of hours in some cases. Yet firaxaxis cant solve the same within many months!?! But forget for a moment the obvious stuff that the fans have fixed... think of the root problems in the game that the major modders now have a MAJOR problem with. And think of how many of us think the AI is still daft. Or who think that the warlord vassals are still broken. And who think that the BTS promised fixes, only broke the game worse! Not only did BTS fail with BTS, bit it also failed to fix warlords which was left unfixed waiting for BTS to fix it. BTS didnt fix warlords... it only broke it worse and then it even fracked up everything that was new in BTS. It is so unreal how they fracked it up that it is surreal! Truth is stranger than fiction and firaxis has fracked it up so bad that our best fiction writers may have had trouble imagining just how badly firaxis has fracked themselves up. You can argue this from a fanbois slutty pov but look at the facts of this matter and you can NOT argue that BTS fixed nothing and only broke everything that it introduced. Garbage in, Garbage out!

Using fracked doesn't change the meaning, or intent. Please don't use that type of language.

Wow - that was constructive. :rolleyes:

The only reality that we all need to rememeber is that Firaxis has NO legal/contractual obligation to even patch the game once. Once you fork over your hard earned cash for the game - that ends the official relationship you have with them. Period.

Now - it makes good business sense to relase patches and fixes after release, but they don't have to do it. At least Firaxis is not like EA and is still releasing patches and supporting games once they are released.

We complain that we don't hear anything from them at all. Then we do. So how do we respond? We complain that it is not "official". Can we not just take the info that Jon has given us and at least be happy that there is indeed another patch on the way?

I agree with the previous poster that this thread can only devolve into nothingness like the last few. It is time for it to be closed before it becomes a total flame/troll war.We hear NOTHING from them save for unofficial civ fanatic postings by firaxian employees which is NOTHING!! Their unofficial postings mean absolutley NOTHING. Hear that it means NOTHING! I respect their heads up but there is NOTHING to hold there talk accountable. They can say any best wishes unofficially. Thy can even believe it as I think they do. But it means NOTHING as they have no control over the powers that be who probably treat them like mushrooms... as in keep them in the dark and feed them shite.

As to the ...<Snip>... having no legal/contractual obligation to patch their game well I do think that can be disputed but we are not yet ready for that as societies. There are lemon laws for cars and there are laws for software as well. But even though there may be no lemon law or standards to base a case on the firaxian crap right now, that they have sold us, it is clear that their future rests upon just how we take this BS. Promises offered and marketed but not kept will soon apply to software as it does everything else. But the ...<Snip>... may be dead long before then due to their stupidity and lack of foresight, and possible greed.

Wow - that was constructive. :rolleyes:
[...]
You should have seen that he was quoting somebody claiming to be satisfied with the state of the game after 3.13 AND the Bhruic patch.

I mean, come on! This actually is really the behaviour of a fanboy. The fanbase (actually, mostly two persons) have patched the patches over and over, and now somebody states to be satisfied with the Firaxis performance. :lol:

In addition to this, I do not see anybody complaining about the fact that Jon Shafer communicated with the fanbase, yet the complaints are directed to Firaxis/TakeTwo as a company.
Here I have to agree completely. The company still makes some money with Civ4 in whatever version they throw it onto the shelves, but they obviously do not care very much about any customer who already has paid.

Of course, there is no legal requirement to issue patches, yet the way in which this company acts - based on their official announcements - is not very respectful, to say the least.

Pointing out these things I cannot see as a flamewar or bashing somebody.

My UN resolution proposal is to wait for the next patch to come before going on on posting inside this thread cause considering the answer has been officially given I would wait a while before spawing this threrad again ;)

Come on people, what's the deal. There are complaints when Firaxis is silent about patching and than when they state (unofficially) there will be a patch, there are complaints about that!

Thread closed!

I'm going to open this thread back up, but let's understand a few things. You can complain about Firaxis/Take2 all you want, but please do so respectfully. Calling them them insulting names is no different than calling another poster that.

Keep this discussion civil.

I apologize for any derogatory remarks I have made towards firaxis and any posters in this thread. My emotions havent changed, but perhaps I should have used different words?.. actually I do see how I could have said near the same things differently. Sorry all... for that disrespect

You should have seen that he was quoting somebody claiming to be satisfied with the state of the game after 3.13 AND the Bhruic patch.

I mean, come on! This actually is really the behaviour of a fanboy. The fanbase (actually, mostly two persons) have patched the patches over and over, and now somebody states to be satisfied with the Firaxis performance. :lol:


Actually - I was referring to the language and the flaming as being non-constructive - not the greater point he was trying to make.

And yes - grumbler was saying that he was happy with 3.13 and Bhruic's work. I did not read that as being "rah rah Firaxis" only that he was happy with the game in that state and for him it wasn't as bad as it is for White Elk.

@White Elk - thanks for standing up and taking responsibility. Many of our fellow posters would not be so honorable.

With the "luck" and quality of work put into the latest patches, I have zero hopes for the next and perhaps last patch.

Come on people, what's the deal. There are complaints when Firaxis is silent about patching and than when they state (unofficially) there will be a patch, there are complaints about that!

Thread closed!

I think that the point of this thread still stands, Methos ( and BTW IMHO you did well on reopening it )..... Firaxis as a company simply had been silent since the release of the 3.13 patch ( that has some "loose strings" to say the least..... ). The only thing that we had until now were posts from CFC members ( that ,by accident :rolleyes: , are part of the Civ IV programming team :lol: ) stating some developments. With all the respect for Shaefer and Alex, in terms of reliability, that has the save valour of a kitchen gossip or of a bar talk ( the point that White Elk tried to expose with a somewhat overflamming language.... ). Patches are released by Firaxis and not by Shaefer or Alex, and if tomorrow a Take2 shark decides, because of something not specified , that there is no patch ( like if CEO decisions were always rational.... ), even if they are working in one until the present moment, do you think that the patch will come out?....

What some people here wanted ( and what the OP said ) was a line in the BtS , in the official Civ IV or in the Firaxis/Take2 site saying something among this lines " we are currently working in a patch to BtS and it is expected to be released in x time". It would worth as much as any corporate promise, but it would be a nice gesture ( and IMHO a good PR move ATM )

What some people here wanted ( and what the OP said ) was a line in the BtS , in the official Civ IV or in the Firaxis/Take2 site saying something among this lines " we are currently working in a patch to BtS and it is expected to be released in x time".

I can't see that ever happening. If they posted that than they would be obligated to fulfill it. By not posting it, than if the decision is made not to patch, they can do so without have to back out of a public announcement.

I can't see that ever happening. If they posted that than they would be obligated to fulfill it. By not posting it, than if the decision is made not to patch, they can do so without have to back out of a public announcement.

But that is exacly the point, Methos. Some Civ fans want a little certainty about the future of the game they bought, and Firaxis ( by reasons that do not concern to the argument ) is not willing to give it... And all the fuzz of this thread ( and others that died out ) resumes to that. Some people stated that in their ( and mine ) opinion Firaxis has a moral ( can't find a better word ) obligation of resolving the problems of the game they sell ( software should come with a warranty, like any other product IMHO, but I understand the dificulties of implementing that ) and some other stated that Firaxis does not have any kind of legal obligation of patching ( true enough ). And like both groups were talking of diferent things, the mood soured quickly..... But on topic again.....

Until now Shaefer and Alex had been a reliable source of intel. Let us just hope that it continues that way :please:

I hereby suggest a general amnesty for Firaxis and wish them good luck with Civ: Revolution!

(while secretly hoping any money earned goes into either Civ 5 or the next patch :) )

I couldn't tell you how many times I've went to the movies (I seldom go now) or buy a DVD and found stupid mistakes in the movie which was never corrected. Thus games or movies are seldom perfect. Even if there isn't another patch I've got my money worth out of BTS and am thankful for all those at Firaxis for all their hard work put into the game even if it does have flaws.
Even at Galciv2 forum with all Brad has done to his game, got some who complain about how buggy the game is. Brad suggested to one not to ever buy a game from them again as it will probably have bugs also.

I can't see that ever happening. If they posted that than they would be obligated to fulfill it. By not posting it, than if the decision is made not to patch, they can do so without have to back out of a public announcement.
God forbid they make a promise to fix a game and actually fulfill that promise.

To twist your words, are you saying that Firaxis isn't willing to do something that simple? That they'd be unable to follow through on a patch? Or they're not "man enough" to admit they'd run into delays if they did?

Other software companies happily make official announcements to their user base. Others have regular communications. Many choose to make such promises, choose take action, and choose to follow through. And then there are some companies that don't.

I'm surprised that Firaxis would actively direct users to a site like this and then choose to not have an official spokesperson to address things when bad press comes up. As I've said before, I suspect simply having an official line of communication to keep us in the loop would address most of our concerns. Regularly popping in once a month to give an update, pimping a new download on their site, and plugging an upcomming release would keep everyone happy (bean counters, lawyers, and marketers included).

And to grumbler, their patches that introduced gamebreaking bugs were most definitely crippleware.

To twist your words, are you saying that Firaxis isn't willing to do something that simple?

I don't work for Firaxis, so I can't speak for them. I'm just a poster like you, expressing my opinion. Besides, this isn't as simple as you think.

That they'd be unable to follow through on a patch? Or they're not "man enough" to admit they'd run into delays if they did?

Your forgetting that it doesn't just consist of them saying they will or won't. There is a financial obligation involved. Consider the resources that would need to be delegated towards the patch, when they could be used on other projects.

Other software companies happily make official announcements to their user base. Others have regular communications. Many choose to make such promises, choose take action, and choose to follow through. And then there are some companies that don't.

I agree, but your statement doesn't really say anything.

I'm surprised that Firaxis would actively direct users to a site like this and then choose to not have an official spokesperson to address things when bad press comes up.

I'm currently at work, so I don't have access to the official site, so excuse if I'm wrong on this. I'm basing it off memory. Doesn't the link on the official site that points towards CFC state it is in regards to technical issues and other problems?

As I've said before, I suspect simply having an official line of communication to keep us in the loop would address most of our concerns.

I agree, but this is just our opinion.

Not to stir a hornet's nest but I am inmild agreement with alot of what WhiteElk said. Just minus the frustration. My frustration period was in Vanilla. At this point, I got milked, I am aware. Won't be happening again. And I will be dissappointed if I continue to watch civ go down this road.

This thread has came a long way since I last read it. So allow me to bounce around.

Firaxis was responsible for making it moddable enough so that someone like Bhruic could fix most of their bugs. So you gotta give 'em some credit.
I agree with that to an extent. The reason T2 'allowed' the SDK was because they saw "$$$" because they know moddability is good for sales. Not because they thought it was something that would make a great game better or to show love to the fans of the title.
As Bello said:
I always thought that the moddability of Civ4 was both, good for the modding community AND good for marketing,<snip>
This here is why they did it. It is win/win. And btw they don't really care that it is win on our side. It got a "checkmark in the box" because it was win on T2's side.
as they can always "duck and cover" behind this.
I don't even think this was planned. This I think was something the community has granted them by giving us a "win" on our side. So really T2 is winning 2 times out of this deal. They get their win. (Profits) And also somehow get credit for our win. (Moddability - suppose to be there for mods not patches.) I have no problem sharing that credit with Firaxis. As alot of people that made 4 are fans of the game. But T2 shouldn't get credit at all. As far as I am concerned, that's business. How many deals do you think I take a day that is win/lose and not in my favor? I would hope no one on this forum does that.
To buy this game I had to invest or even "risk losing" money by purchasing the game that I may or may not like. To make me want to buy this game T2 had to invest or even "risk losing" money to make the game worth buying. No they don't get credit for that.

I wouldn't call the patches crippleware. I suspect that a lot of people don't even notice the bugs left.
I'm actually quite happy with the current state of the game (3.13 + bhruic).
But is that statement true if you take off "+Bhruic"? Was it true with 3.02 if you take off "+Solver"?
Wouldn't it be great if the "moddability" of civ 4 could actually be seen as the "moddability" and not the "possibility for a proper investment"?
View it from this perspective and see if you feel the same way:
But from the perspective of someone who's not a regular in these forums, or a computer newbie uncomfortable with unofficial patches, then yeah, I agree that Firaxis really dropped the ball. Without Bhruic's unofficial patch, and given the low quality of Firaxis/Take2 tech support, those folks are left stranded with a broken game.
Civ 4 probably came across to these people as a game that "had a neat idea" but couldn't pull it off.

But unofficial postings mean absolutely nothing...
This is very true.
This is a quote from a Firaxian on this site. Pre-Warlords release when the fans were upset that they had to buy the new expansion pack to get any further "fixes" (patches) for the game. And, of course, they thought it sucked and were starting a tantrum throwing contest I participated in.
It was mentioned a few times in this thread that Warlords will be required for future Civ 4 patches. Where was this ever mentioned before? As an FYI, Civ 4 will remain independent of Warlords for any future patches. :)
Notice how he says "Where was this ever mentioned before"? Wel,, it hadn't been. Because they didn't have fan communication back then either. But the fans had guessed it right.
But for kicks, notice how he said Civ 4 will remain independant of Warlords for future patches. He was right. And they never patched Civ 4 again until 1.74. Which had to do with multiplayer bugs I believe. Chariots still don't counter axes in vanilla IIRC.
So yes, while we may appreciate Firaxians communicating to us. Just remember "fibbing" is a form of communication. I am not saying that a Firaxian would intentionally lie, but I am saying that they may unintentionally do it. As anytime a Firaxian speaks up "unofficially" they are putting words in the mouth of T2. What they will relay is what is on the "rumor mill" at Firaxis.
Can we not just take the info that Jon has given us and at least be happy that there is indeed another patch on the way?
No we cannot. It is not an official announcement. It's hearsay. It could easily rumor based off the fact that T2 is discussing possibly funding or coming out with another patch.

BTS was to fix the broken Warlords and not only did BTS fail in fixing Warlords but it failed in every aspect that was new in BTS.
And Warlords was the "fix" for vanilla. I am tired of seeing this constant money leeching form of financial support. We support them more than they support us.

The reason I mention these thing s along with the "Silence" as I know some people are saying "what does that have to do with anything?" But this all falls under the "support" catagory. I wouldn't care about the silence so much if the game didn't seem to be constantly sitting on a hollow foundation of support.

Meh this'll work. As I am re-reviewing the thread seems alot of this will actually get double-triple coverage.

I think it might be reasonable for Firaxis to make official announcement about patch under work once a patch project has been resourced and work started. Financially commitment has been made already, and the gain from disbanding such a project midwork isn't very big (or rather some gains are too hard to realize and the rest aren't financially big anymore). Also note that an announcement about patch does not yet say that it's going to fix everything ever complained about. Common method in limiting expenses would be to cut the number of items to be included in the patch, ie. "drop all hard-to-test items, drop all balancing items, do only bugfixes".

If such an announcement would be made, I'd expect it to be made by official spokesperson (be that nonexistent fan relations person or other public relations or even marketing personnel), and on official forums. However, as Methos already noted, official website directs to CFC in Technical Support (under Support section), and so CFC forums could constitute a good place to make such an announcement.

Consistency however argues for not pre-releasing patch information. Firaxis makes announcement once patch is released (or to be released, the two are still targeted to same timeframe, eg. same day), not before. Exceptions are unlikely, so unless the business culture there changes so that the upper management considers pre-announcing to have positive impact on profits (and preferably on same quarter, or at least in such ways that they are still counted for this decision made by these managers so they will get bonuses for it) this will not happen now nor in the future.

If, in the meantime, some developers or designers are given enough freedom to voice unofficial inside information, good. We should consider this completely separately from the above (official announcement), and relish in the potential discussion with developers, without constraining ourselves to the "make your bosses announce this officially" mindset (which is useless).

I would actually hope that Bhruic and Solver have been in contact with developers working on the patches. Maybe via private messages, maybe via email, and probably they won't be talking about that (it was done in private to avoid public outcry afterall). Also I would hope that developers do find some time (hopefully time they can bill from their employer even) to read bug report forum, maybe even other forums here. If they decide to comment publicly on something, all the better.

In any case try to remember that CFC posters constitute a small but vocal group. We're hardcore fans, but the game finances count on the millions of other gamers. If we use our privileged position responsibly, we may have positive impact. But we can also force any and all impact of CFC posters to be nullified in the future. Tough choice, especially when it's actually made by a small but all the more vocal minority of CFC posters.

I couldn't tell you how many times I've went to the movies (I seldom go now) or buy a DVD and found stupid mistakes in the movie which was never corrected. Thus games or movies are seldom perfect.

Comparing games to movies is a false analogy. Most people don't see a film more than once, and if they do see it again, they are presumably satisfied with it. (If you buy a DVD of a film you haven't seen, then caveat emptor.) But computer games are supposed to be experienced over and over again. Your point is almost as nonsensical as the one made by another poster when I said I'd go back to reading more instead because books are not buggy or refuse to start. He began to talk about "logical inconsistencies" by the author, which is a quite different matter than bugs. (It would be more a case of disliking the book as such, which is not comparable to posters here complaining about Firaxis's performance with regard to BtS.) If a book was released with as many printing errors and mistakes (think typos galore, blank pages, pages in the wrong order, pages upside down, missing passages and so on), then all the copies would be reclaimed and the printing office told to do a proper job. And people who had bought the book would get their money back. OK - it's no doubt harder to publish a bugfree game than a book with few typing errors. And, as I said, films are generally seen only once. That is precisely why comparing games to books or films is pointless.

I also want to state, once more, that I am truly grateful to Jon Shafer for giving his information to us. But that does not mean that I have to feel that Take 2/Firaxis have done a good job, either with the patching or in the field of consumer relations. I don't have to feel that precisely because Shafer is not speaking in an official capacity.

There's a third point I simply feel I have to make. Some posters here seem to think that the Apostolic Palace on the menu screen is the Firaxis headquarters, and that Sid Meier is the Vicar of Christ. That isn't so. One does not go to hell for criticizing them.

Folks, here is how it is with patching software (something I know about, since I make my living developing software -- though things much more boring than games):

You don't know if a bug fix revision should be released until it tests successfully.

You don't know if it tests successfully until it is literally 100% done testing. At any point there could be a discovery which sends you back to square 1 of the patch cycle. If you think it is possible to decide before you get 100% done, then I have to ask, why are you still testing if you are so sure you won't find something?

Ergo, you do not know for SURE when a patch can be delivered until literally the moment you deliver it.

Now, if you have a user base like I am lucky to mostly have right now, what you do is give them updates, tell them "Things are going well, I think we'll move it on Friday assuming nothing comes up," and then if on Wednesday morning comes and you find something, you write them and tell them it's changed. Over time users can develop a feel, they can discover perhaps that maybe 80% of the time the developer's estimate is correct, and decide to play those odds or not for some processing they need to decide to do now or put off. And if they're smart they never harass the developers for a delay, eve if maybe internally they feel frustrated they still say, "hey, good thing you caught that!"

But if you don't have a user base like me, you have a user base like Firaxis has with many on this site who aren't so smart to understand they are hurting their own self-interest, you have users who will scream bloody murder and run you down publicly for doing them the favor of giving them estimates you never claimed were certain in the first place, then ... well, if it were me, I wouldn't tell them a g0dd@mn thing ever again. They would find out there's a patch when they fired up the software & find it's being installed.

Why is this so hard to understand. I've had both kinds of user bases in my career, and trust me even if the latter type of user gets an estimate, it's going to be a VERY conservative one. It shouldn't even take being a software developer to see this. Anyone who truly doesn't understand why alexman or other firaxians doesn't post patch updates here any more, I question if they have any people skills at all, they clearly have not progressed completely beyond the early psychological state of babies where they cannot empathize with other people and understand their motivations. People like this should NOT go into sales, lol.

p.s. it's should be already clear, but: For the $10 I paid for BTS, I don't feel I have any basis for complaint. I expect them to fix obvious bugs, yes, but I don't feel I have basis for demanding justification on how long it takes to do it. And I am one of the former types of user groups I described: Firaxis has established a history of eventually resolving the "breaker" bugs with their products in the past, and I take faith in that.

No we cannot. It is not an official announcement. It's hearsay. It could easily rumor based off the fact that T2 is discussing possibly funding or coming out with another patch.

I would say it is a little more solid than hearsay. You are correct that it is not official, and therefore is not guaranteed, but it is a whole lot better than no information at all. The primary benefit that this community has received inside information from Jon's posting that he is aware that there will be another patch. Before his post many of us were wondering (some would say crying) if they had dropped any further development on CIV. Now, unless Jon is lying (which I seriously doubt, even if unintentionally) we know that they have not dropped CIV and there will be another patch.

My issue with the tone of some of the posts was that before Jon posted, we were screaming for information. Once we got some information we kept screaming because it was not official. There wasn't even a day of "OK, I'm calmer now that I know there will be another patch."

I am not arguing that Firaxis is some paragon of virtue here (lest I be accused of being a fanboy), because I think that they could do a lot of things better, including official communication to the fan base.

If, in the meantime, some developers or designers are given enough freedom to voice unofficial inside information, good. We should consider this completely separately from the above (official announcement), and relish in the potential discussion with developers, without constraining ourselves to the "make your bosses announce this officially" mindset (which is useless).

[...]

In any case try to remember that CFC posters constitute a small but vocal group. We're hardcore fans, but the game finances count on the millions of other gamers. If we use our privileged position responsibly, we may have positive impact. But we can also force any and all impact of CFC posters to be nullified in the future. Tough choice, especially when it's actually made by a small but all the more vocal minority of CFC posters.

Emphasis mine - I completely agree. We do not live in a black and white world, where there is always a right and wrong side to every argument.

There is always two sides to any relationship. We can choose to be constructive in expressing our needs, or we can be irrational and demand the world. How we conduct ourselves is our choice, but we must understand that it will impact the relationship, either positively or negatively.

If we keep complaining and being irrational (i.e. "Firaxis is evil"; "They don't care about us", etc...) then the likelihood of open, honest communication goes down. If we are respectful and constructive (and perhaps a little understanding), but still get our needs across, then the likelihood of open, honest communication goes up.

It is our choice.

I would say it is a little more solid that hearsay.
Well, I can agree with that. But it really isnt that much more at all. It can easily be "rounded off" to hearsay. It's practically hearsay.
You are correct that it is not official, and therefore is not guaranteed, but it is a whole lot better than no information at all.
I would say its the same thing.

I said the following in this same thread in this post (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6075433&postcount=214) before Jon ever posted anything.
There is still time... but I'm not buying any new firaxis products in the future - not at release day anyway :(That makes 3 of us then. I like BTS. I actually still think another patch is on the way too.
All Jon did say was what I was already pretty sure about. But that patch may not come until 2009-10. Or it may not come at all although I doubt it. (see Firaxian quote from my last post.)

There will be another patch at some point, but it's going to be a little while, so hopefully you guys can be patient.

Jon

whatever you do, DO NOT POST A TIME FRAME! it will just make people even more mad if and when you dont hit it.Well, I guess it's a good thing I have no idea when it's going to be released then.

Jon
It could easily be a very long time off.

The primary benefit that this community has received inside information from Jon's posting that he is aware that there will be another patch.
But the problem is that we don't know what he knows from his statement. We know he said and its vague. I ain't mad about that or anything. Just stating that for all we know he could 'know' a patch is on the agenda. Agendas change sometimes. Priorities shift things. He didn't even say the magical 'soon' word. Instead there are "at some point", "be patient", "little while". Those are key things I say when seriously "I don't know".

I don't doubt there will be a patch either eventually. But I seriously wouldn't be shocked if it got pushed back so far that T2 finally gets to it and says "Oh this game? It's like 4-5 years old. Meh, CivRev is out and Civ 5 is on the way Let's just hold on to that money."

Again, not saying this is what will happen just saying its still within the limits of reason based off our "inside information".
Now, unless Jon is lying (which I seriously doubt, even if unintentionally) Me too we know that they have not dropped CIV and there will be another patch.

My issue with the tone of some of the posts was that before Jon posted, we were screaming for information. Once we got some information we kept screaming because it was not official. There wasn't even a day of "OK, I'm calmer now that I know there will be another patch."

I am not arguing that Firaxis is some paragon of virtue here (lest I be accused of being a fanboy), because I think that they could do a lot of things better, including official communication to the fan base.
I agree with you on this. It was kinda wild. I think 3.13 really upset alot of people though. I hate to say it seriously but I wont be buying Civ titles on release now. I may not even buy 5 until Complete comes out and price drops once. It would take a serious amount of change before I consider trusting the Firaxis name again as 2k has now tarnished it badly for me.

I don't hold it against the developers at Firaxis as I am aware their hands are tied. But I am not going to support the 'prostitution' of the Firaxis logo either.

I agree with a good amount of what Elandal said. But not all. I don't think anything bad of the people employed by Firaxis. I am however upset that 2K is ruining a good game (my favorite game series since 1 on SNES) and doing nothing about it. And they offer no aid in any kind of support. I am seriously amazed they even allow patches. Although these patches wouldn't be needed as bad if they weren't shoved out the door to get it off the agenda as quick as possible. (Which is me speculating yes, but come on.) Since release I felt this version didn't sit dignified on the shelf as its previous versions did still selling many plenty of copies. Instead this time I feel like some guy comes running up to me looking like he has been awake for 5 days straight, shoving it in my face saying "look at this kewl game dood!" with the box scotch taped and a french manual inside unable to explain the mislabeled discs. It has yet to have a solid plateua, unless you include 2.08 which I skipped so I don't know. And then its support is a fan site like this one. You are not discussing the issue you have with the game you bought today with the makers of the game because they can't be bothered by your computer issues. Fix your computer. So instead, they send you to a website. And this is just simply one aspect of it.

It isn't (for me) entirely about "they aren't talking" or when they do talk "it isn't official" or when it is official "they won't give a date". Seriously I don't care about the date. It's not like I cross out my calendar anyways. Although, I think it would be great if official announcements you speak of Elandal were posted on the main site. (As currently that site is seriously good-for-nothing. Unless you unaware of CFC;)) But we show up in alot of google/yahoo searches. Hehe. But basically it is support as a whole just sucks this go around. Let's hope GTA 4 does something illegal again, 2K's stock finally tanks and get bought out or merge with Blizzard. (Yeah right, we all know EA is next in line if Firaxis moves again.) :(

Folks, here is how it is with patching software (something I know about, since I make my living developing software -- though things much more boring than games):

You don't know if a bug fix revision should be released until it tests successfully.

You don't know if it tests successfully until it is literally 100% done testing. At any point there could be a discovery which sends you back to square 1 of the patch cycle. If you think it is possible to decide before you get 100% done, then I have to ask, why are you still testing if you are so sure you won't find something?

Ergo, you do not know for SURE when a patch can be delivered until literally the moment you deliver it.

Now, if you have a user base like I am lucky to mostly have right now, what you do is give them updates, tell them "Things are going well, I think we'll move it on Friday assuming nothing comes up," and then if on Wednesday morning comes and you find something, you write them and tell them it's changed. Over time users can develop a feel, they can discover perhaps that maybe 80% of the time the developer's estimate is correct, and decide to play those odds or not for some processing they need to decide to do now or put off. And if they're smart they never harass the developers for a delay, eve if maybe internally they feel frustrated they still say, "hey, good thing you caught that!"

But if you don't have a user base like me, you have a user base like Firaxis has with many on this site who aren't so smart to understand they are hurting their own self-interest, you have users who will scream bloody murder and run you down publicly for doing them the favor of giving them estimates you never claimed were certain in the first place, then ... well, if it were me, I wouldn't tell them a g0dd@mn thing ever again. They would find out there's a patch when they fired up the software & find it's being installed.

Why is this so hard to understand. I've had both kinds of user bases in my career, and trust me even if the latter type of user gets an estimate, it's going to be a VERY conservative one. It shouldn't even take being a software developer to see this. Anyone who truly doesn't understand why alexman or other firaxians doesn't post patch updates here any more, I question if they have any people skills at all, they clearly have not progressed completely beyond the early psychological state of babies where they cannot empathize with other people and understand their motivations. People like this should NOT go into sales, lol.

p.s. it's should be already clear, but: For the $10 I paid for BTS, I don't feel I have any basis for complaint. I expect them to fix obvious bugs, yes, but I don't feel I have basis for demanding justification on how long it takes to do it. And I am one of the former types of user groups I described: Firaxis has established a history of eventually resolving the "breaker" bugs with their products in the past, and I take faith in that.

First of all the Civilization franchise earned a great deal of well earned respect during the last ~15 years, but the recent growing mob of disappointed people is founded in the disrespect Firaxis shows its loyal customers by putting the patch issue lower than low in their prioritizings.

People dont give a **** about how Firaxis decides to do things or the process of a patch - the ordinary customer wants a working product, which I dont feel I have bought. All they are achieving are the absence of long-time fans of Civ when its time for civ5 launch.

First of all the Civilization franchise earned a great deal of well earned respect during the last ~15 years, but the recent growing mob of disappointed people is founded in the disrespect Firaxis shows its loyal customers by putting the patch issue lower than low in their prioritizings.

People dont give a **** about how Firaxis decides to do things or the process of a patch - the ordinary customer wants a working product, which I dont feel I have bought. All they are achieving are the absence of long-time fans of Civ when its time for civ5 launch.You are missing my point. You are demanding a 100% reliable answer to a question that is impossible for Firaxis to give a 100% reliable answer for, and then you crucify them for it no matter whether they give it & it is not correct, or don't give it.

Nothing has changed as far as patch development estimates in 15 years, I'm betting they could estimate patch delivery dates no better for DOS Civ I than they can for BTS. The only difference is that there are places like this for Civ developers to publicize those estimates to you, and people like you with entitlement issues to whine incessantly when it turns out they are not perfect & clairvoyant after all.

Please, just STOP buying firaxis products then if you are not getting $20-$30 worth of enjoyment from BTS & it's shoddy quality has impaired your life so.

Sheez.

Now, if you have a user base like I am lucky to mostly have right now, what you do is give them updates, tell them "Things are going well, I think we'll move it on Friday assuming nothing comes up," and then if on Wednesday morning comes and you find something, you write them and tell them it's changed. Over time users can develop a feel, they can discover perhaps that maybe 80% of the time the developer's estimate is correct, and decide to play those odds or not for some processing they need to decide to do now or put off. And if they're smart they never harass the developers for a delay, eve if maybe internally they feel frustrated they still say, "hey, good thing you caught that!"
I think this is something Firaxis could easily not only 'get away with' but actually increase the size of their interested fanbase. The vocal fanbase may grow.

But if you don't have a user base like me, you have a user base like Firaxis has with many on this site who aren't so smart to understand they are hurting their own self-interest, you have users who will scream bloody murder and run you down publicly for doing them the favor of giving them estimates you never claimed were certain in the first place, then ... well, if it were me, I wouldn't tell them a g0dd@mn thing ever again. They would find out there's a patch when they fired up the software & find it's being installed.
This is a result of what happens when you neglect ANYTHING and then pay it some attention in small portions. It reacts overzealously. People don't get hostile on here because they are natural born asses. It's because they are neglected for long periods of time and then when they actually get an small oppurtunity to voice a their concerns/frustrations they blow up. Look at how long this thread had been brewing before Jon came in to say anything. Then when people overreact its shocking behavior?

EDIT: Don't get me wrong. I appreciate what Jon said I guess. Personally, it's not very useful info to me - nor promising - nor negative. Just there I guess. I mean thanks but I am not too concerned. The guy works for his money like anyone else and deserves respect regardless. I am just neutral as for the information. "I am adopting a wait and see attitude towards the issue." ;)

Please, just STOP buying firaxis products then if you are not getting $20-$30 worth of enjoyment from BTS & it's shoddy quality has impaired your life so.

Sheez.

Alot of us already plan on it. It isn't like we enjoy talking smack about our favorite game.

P.S. I don't think anyone in this entire thread is mad because a 100% reliable date wasn't supplied. That has to do more with the whole Alexman debacle a little while back. And it even has a weird grey area. I didn't see that thread though before it was deleted.

[...]
P.S. I don't think anyone in this entire thread is mad because a 100% reliable date wasn't supplied. That has to do more with the whole Alexman debacle a little while back. And it even has a weird grey area. I didn't see that thread though before it was deleted.
I did read that threat and I really think it is one of the most misquoted threats in the whole forum.
People were happy with Alexman announcing the patch. People were even more happy to hear that the patch was to be released soon.
Then they were a bit disappointed that further bugs had been detected and the patch therefore would come later, but they understood.
And then the dates were missed without any remark anymore. Of course, people were asking "Hey, what's going on?"

And then one of the most annoying "automatic" processes of this and other forums started - the all-wise, knowing each and everything people showed up and explained, why one should shut up asking, why one should up whining and so on. You all know the story - maybe not from that particular thread, but from the many many other ones.
And soon, the typical ping-pong started: "You whiner!" - "I don't whine, I am just asking" - "You see, you're a bloody whiner! Shut up! Leave CFC! Go and die!" - "Shut up for yourself, you silly fanboy!" (Of course I am overexaggerating the process, but try to put 10 pages into 4 lines ;) )
And finally somebody said: "Alexman has been insulted!" - which up to that time as far as I could see just never had been the case.

And out of a sudden people were accusing each other why and for what reason Alexman had or had not or had rightfully or had not rightfully be insulted or not insulted or why there were people demanding a patch when there was no legal reason or why somebody had every right to demand a patch or may be had not every right but might have some right or might not or ...... :lol:
The end of the story is history.

Thanks for closing the thread. Respect your decision to reopen it having given the guys a shot across their bows. Doubt the thread can go anywhere constructive, but thanks for monitoring and responding.

Regards - Mr P

p.s. it's should be already clear, but: For the $10 I paid for BTS, I don't feel I have any basis for complaint. I expect them to fix obvious bugs, yes, but I don't feel I have basis for demanding justification on how long it takes to do it. And I am one of the former types of user groups I described: Firaxis has established a history of eventually resolving the "breaker" bugs with their products in the past, and I take faith in that.

Some people who remember how the last XP for Civ III was simply left hanging in the air don't share your faith.

Thanks for closing the thread. Respect your decision to reopen it having given the guys a shot across their bows. Doubt the thread can go anywhere constructive, but thanks for monitoring and responding.

Regards - Mr P

Criticism of Firaxis is a quite legitimate topic. If you don't like such discussions, then don't read this thread. It is as pointless as playing a buggy computer game which was broken completely by an official patch.

I doubt "a lot of us" are really planning to stop buying Firaxis products. I would expect that most of "us" (CFC posters?) haven't decided one way or another on "Firaxis products" (as that's too general for most of us) but rather just consider this one of the issues affecting future decisions.

I for example will eventually buy Civ5. Yes, one will be made - it's a good franchise that will bring money in with just the name. Even if I feel Firaxis / Take2 isn't handling game / expansion release and patching very well, or that they seem to totally lack fan relations people, I still will buy that one. Also, I already know that I'm not going to buy their console games - I don't have console to play them on anyway (and am not planning to buy one).

But assume that they release some other game that works on whatever platform I think about playing it on, I see some nice review and think it might be a good game. At that point I might remember some patching problems in civ, and even if I haven't seen the bugs that have made game unplayable for some people, I just might decide to wait and see on that game. Read fan reviews, fan support forums after it's out. Maybe wait for a patch. Or maybe wait until it's available in cheaper form (used, in sale, cheap edition, whatever). That decision does not totally remove me from Firaxis sales, but lowers the margin they get from me. Then again, could be that in the meantime they hire a fan support agent and work more to make sure fans are happy - could be I decide they work harder and release better than before, so I might as well buy it already.

In any case, for some reason I still expect that once Civ5 is out the vocal fans that swore to never touch Firaxis products again will be back here, complaining about how buggy Civ5 is and how they predicted Firaxis' problems continue already long ago.

Criticism of Firaxis is a quite legitimate topic. If you don't like such discussions, then don't read this thread. It is as pointless as playing a buggy computer game which was broken completely by an official patch.

Not necessarily. Some people read, or listen to discussions they don't like or disagree with for their own reasoning. One of my former professors used to listen to a local talk radio show every morning on his way to work. He couldn't stand the guy and never called in to the station, but enjoyed the mental stimulus from it. Just because someone disagrees with this thread, doesn't mean they shouldn't read it.

So I've been playing Civ since Civ1 (I'm not old, I just started playing young!) and if I remember rightly there has been a small bunch of disgruntled fans moaning about the patching process with every release. Some things never change.

On the other hand, in the last year or so, some companies have had success with smaller more frequent patches (relying on systems like Steam to push out patches). Civ4 can't benefit from this because it relies on the user manually checking for patches, but Civ 5 might be able to.

(Of course there are also those who don't like having patches thrust upon them)

You are missing my point. You are demanding a 100% reliable answer to a question that is impossible for Firaxis to give a 100% reliable answer for, and then you crucify them for it no matter whether they give it & it is not correct, or don't give it.

Nothing has changed as far as patch development estimates in 15 years, I'm betting they could estimate patch delivery dates no better for DOS Civ I than they can for BTS. The only difference is that there are places like this for Civ developers to publicize those estimates to you, and people like you with entitlement issues to whine incessantly when it turns out they are not perfect & clairvoyant after all.

Please, just STOP buying firaxis products then if you are not getting $20-$30 worth of enjoyment from BTS & it's shoddy quality has impaired your life so.

Sheez.

If a software company ever said that nothing had changed in their work progress during the last 15 years, then I would certainly begin to have some doubts as to their future.

You call it whining, I call it an expression of my opinion. And I accept the fact that I cant do anything to get a working product, but the facts of the patches for civ4, warlords and BTS also tell of whats to come. A wise man once said that in order to know the future, you also need to know the past.

And rest assured, I will not buy civ5 before I read user comments, bug reports and make sure it isnt the same as civ4.

And, as I said, films are generally seen only once. That is precisely why comparing games to books or films is pointless.

I also want to state, once more, that I am truly grateful to Jon Shafer for giving his information to us. But that does not mean that I have to feel that Take 2/Firaxis have done a good job, either with the patching or in the field of consumer relations. I don't have to feel that precisely because Shafer is not speaking in an official capacity.

I have no way of knowing but I bet you the majority of those who bought civ4 or BTS has already shelf the game by now and playing something else. (only a few are hardcore civ-fanatics) This is one reason consoles are so popular, play the game and forget just like a movie. But in cases where someone watchs a movie or play even a console game over and over will more likely to find serious flaws in the movie or game. For example my son found some serious flaws/bugs in Socom 2 after play it for months (now years) while the average gamer would be playing something else after finishing the single player.
Thus in most cases only a small minority plays the game long enough to find all the bugs in the game. So there comes a point where the company is making a patch for this small minority in which some you will never satisfy anyways.

Wow - that was constructive. :rolleyes:

The only reality that we all need to rememeber is that Firaxis has NO legal/contractual obligation to even patch the game once. Once you fork over your hard earned cash for the game - that ends the official relationship you have with them. Period. I think that it's probable that a jury would disagree with you. Especially in instances of known problems with the product, and especially when the producer continues to sell the product with known problems.

Can we not just take the info that Jon has given us and at least be happy that there is indeed another patch on the way?
Some people here seem to think that the programmers are their friends and these people want to play nice with Firaxis. The programmers are not our friends, they are part of a company that is selling a product. If they fail to meet their obligations then we are very justified in faulting them for it.

If a software company ever said that nothing had changed in their work progress during the last 15 years, then I would certainly begin to have some doubts as to their future.

What ivory tower have you been living in? Most software companies still use a modified form of the spiral model of development (Boehm 1988), so that's nearer 20 years than 15. Some are experimenting with Extreme Programming (1999, so almost 10 years old), but lots of the bigger software companies still consider it to be a bit new and unproven so far...

If a software company ever said that nothing had changed in their work progress during the last 15 years, then I would certainly begin to have some doubts as to their future.Umm, my point was that people (programmers) have not become perfect in the last 15 years. And they certainly don't think faster!

If anything has changed in the last 15 years, it's teh complexity of the Civilization product. So the most reasonable expectation is that, despite their best efforts, it would be HARDER to test & debug Civ, and take longer, not easier & quicker!

Wow - that was constructive. :rolleyes:

The only reality that we all need to rememeber is that Firaxis has NO legal/contractual obligation to even patch the game once. Once you fork over your hard earned cash for the game - that ends the official relationship you have with them. Period.

Although I was active in the late, great and closed previous thread Alexman started, I've stayed out of this one except to thank our Firaxian friend for the information he shared. However, in this debate of opinions, there are occasionally statements regarding facts which need to be addressed.

Your statement regarding Firaxis' post-sale legal obligations is, quite simply, wrong. The law gives purchasers certain rights over and above any contractual commitments and, importantly, even in the face of attempted disclaimers of those rights in a contract of sale or, in this case, a EULA. In some jurisdictions, such rights are codified by statute (e.g., the Uniform Commercial Code) and in others the rights are a matter of common law. Those rights include the implied warranty of fitness and the implied warranty of merchantability. The former is a warranty implied by law that if a seller knows or has reason to know of a particular purpose for which some item is being purchased by the buyer, the seller is guaranteeing that the item is fit for that particular purpose. In the latter, a merchant is guaranteeing that the goods are reasonably fit for the general purpose for which they are sold. So, in the case of software, if it doesn't work on a computer, the purchaser has grounds to claim against the seller/manufacturer. Although it's doubtful that minor bugs would rise to the level of a breach of either such warranty, too many such bugs, or one or more major bugs (e.g., the OOS problem) could certainly rise to that level. To put things into perspective, Merck was in no position to say -- despite conspicuous warnings and documented problems with the product -- that once they sold Vioxx to someone that the buyers who had heart attacks and strokes had no recourse. Suffice to say, dealing adequately with a defective product is not simply good business. It's the law.

I have no way of knowing but I bet you the majority of those who bought civ4 or BTS has already shelf the game by now and playing something else. (only a few are hardcore civ-fanatics) This is one reason consoles are so popular, play the game and forget just like a movie. But in cases where someone watchs a movie or play even a console game over and over will more likely to find serious flaws in the movie or game. For example my son found some serious flaws/bugs in Socom 2 after play it for months (now years) while the average gamer would be playing something else after finishing the single player.
Thus in most cases only a small minority plays the game long enough to find all the bugs in the game. So there comes a point where the company is making a patch for this small minority in which some you will never satisfy anyways.

You didn't exactly have to plat BtS, prepatched and patched, very long to disvover that it was buggy. Furthermore, news of the behaviour of a computer game manufacturer spreads, regardless of how many stll play the game regularly. And actually, I think the number of people who still play Civ may be quite considerable.

Yep I read stuff that I don't agree with, (LOL), as it tends to keep the grey cells working.

It's fascinating to see people's thought processes at work, and I am open minded enough to be swayed by a persuasive constructive argument, but there isn't much evidence of that in this thread.

No one forces you to buy CIV4. No one forces you to use the free patches that follow. No one forces you to buy the expansion BTS and no one forces you to use any of the free patches that relate to it.

So what's the problem?

Well, apparently the problem is that out of the tens and tens of thousands of people who bought the game, a truly insignificant / fractional number of people don't like the game and/or the patch. This is hardly surprising given the numbers of people who bought the game.

What is interesting about all this, is how those people then go about throwing their toys out of the pram. They could have crafted a reasoned constructive argument to support their views so as to elicit the sympathy of fellow gamers, and from that platform entered into a meaningful dialogue with the developers about their grievances. Or they could have created a movement within the MOD community to fix the perceived problem via a bit of DIY.

I have seen both methods used successfully on many, many occasions.

However, the aggrieved minority in this instance throw a massive temper tantrum that can be summarised as follows - "Life is unfair, and it's all your fault".

For the guys with the problem, life is unfair, because they didn't get what they wanted in the game/patch, but let's face if they had, then there would now be a completely different bunch of guys posting an exact same thread claiming that they didn't get what they wanted either.

What's interesting about all this is trying to fathom the mindset of the insignificant minority who stubbornly think life owes them something, and who don't understand that it doesn't. The rest of us understand we have to get what we want for ourselves, and we also know how to do it. They don't, but why don't they?

A simplistic explanation could be that the developer is seen as a sort of father / teacher figure in their eyes, and if the child screams and shouts and stamps their foot long enough, then the all powerful developer will magically make everything right and fair.

The trouble is that explanation is far to simplistic, so I read the destructive posts in this thread that will achieve nothing whatsoever and try and work out what makes these people tick. It passes the time - LOL.

The reason I intervened, is that the thread is now going around and around in circles, and has become very sterile. The content of the thread won't piss off the developer, because they live in the real world that these guys seem pretty clueless about, but you have to admit that this thread is as dead as the proverbial parrot.


Regards - Mr P

So Rvil do you use Bhruic's patch? Before that Solver's?

Umm, my point was that people (programmers) have not become perfect in the last 15 years. And they certainly don't think faster!

If anything has changed in the last 15 years, it's teh complexity of the Civilization product. So the most reasonable expectation is that, despite their best efforts, it would be HARDER to test & debug Civ, and take longer, not easier & quicker!

I couldnt do much than agree with you on this one. But my "whining" was more along the lack of information and their prioritizings. If you are satisfied with your current game, then you might be happy with future installments. But for my case Im far from content with my purchase, hence the "whining". People (read Firaxis) should know when they ...<Snip>... up...

I invariably find it interesting when a poster enters the discussion with what he or she believes to be the overarching truth not only about the discussion specifically, but life in general. As is often the case he/they hold themselves above the fray (after all, you must be above others in order to look down upon them), state opinion as fact, view dissimilar opinions with a bemused contempt and generally hold themselves out as the final arbiter of both the dispute itself and those engaged in it.

As a very recent example, Mr. P cites the freedom to choose whether to buy and play the game, but does so in a way which suggests that, once someone has made the choice to buy and play the game, he/she forfeits the right to comment upon its quality, or lack thereof. In three sentences he thereby dismisses all humanity's voice in commenting upon any discretionary product or service they've chosen to buy, from a meal at a pricey restaurant (one could hear him say: "no one forced you to choose that restaurant") to your home ("there were plenty of other houses in the neighborhood"); from the clothes you wear ("try another brand") to your entertainment choices ("if you're dissatisfied with CIV, watch a movie").

Without having done any research himself, nor citing any source (reputable or otherwise), he decides that those who are less then totally satisfied represent not only a "fraction" of all purchasers, but an "insignificant" fraction at that. He makes no allowance for those who have either not discovered fora such as CFC or have chosen not to participate in them. Nor does he allow for those purchasers who, being so dissatisfied with the product, have had the epiphany to which he refers and not only chosen to play the game no more (perhaps they're watching a movie right now), but have also chosen to waste no more time trying futilely to get the manufacturer to acknowledge their complaints, let alone address such complaints adequately.

He goes on to infantilize all those with complaints as "throwing their toys out of the pram" and "throwing temper tantrums," insisting (in his supercilious way) that they all have an unrealistic view of life and chiding them with the fatherly advice that "life is unfair." Not content with dismissing the complaints of one childish group with the back of one hand, he uses the other to dismiss yet another yet-unheard group whom he is certain would take the place of the first group if the first group were somehow to be satisfied.

He then elevates himself into a superior group of humans who "understand we have to get what we want for ourselves, and we also know how to do it," once again dismissing others "an insignificant minority" of untermenschen who "stubbornly think life owes them something, and who don't understand that it doesn't." He then brings his psychoanalytic prowess to bear concluding that this poor, wretched, "insignificant minority" of humanity is somehow searching for Daddy to make all things right. One can only imagine him standing up at a meeting America's Founding Fathers or in South Africa at a meeting of those fighting Apartheid and reminding them: "Life is unfair, you clueless, insignificant minority. Every other human being who has not raised his or her voice in protest is obviously perfectly satisfied with their lot, why aren't you? We understand that life owes us nothing, why don't you? You need to live in the real world and accept whatever you're given by the almighty powers that be! You should all go home and choose which defective toy to play with -- and be happy about it!"

Why would someone make such a post? One can only speculate that anyone who would do so has a need to feel superior both morally and intellectually and decides that the best way to achieve that end is to denigrate and dismiss others. Rather than truly rising above the situation, he/she takes the more expedient route of casting him or herself as what is, ironically enough, a truly insignificant -- and mythical -- minority of those who have such low expectations of themselves and others that there is nothing in this "unfair" "real world" which can disappoint them nor cause them to stand up for themselves and strive to make things better. Ironically, by holding him or herself above such plebeian concerns while steadfastly refusing even the attempt at righting any wrong they become the proverbial arrogant doormat.

More's the pity.

P.S. Yes, I'm quite aware of the irony of choosing to make this post and its content.

Your statement regarding Firaxis' post-sale legal obligations is, quite simply, wrong. The law gives purchasers certain rights over and above any contractual commitments and, importantly, even in the face of attempted disclaimers of those rights in a contract of sale or, in this case, a EULA...

Go ahead and sue Firaxis then – see how far you get.

Aside from game breaking issues (the OSS problems are the closest we have today, and that is only for a subset of the gaming community) all of the other bugs are subjective in nature. They don’t prevent you from playing the game. What may be “unplayable” for one person would be perfectly fine for another. Take the missing culture display on the build queue for example. Some just “can’t bring themselves to play” the game because of this, but many can. Is it a bug? Yes. Should it be fixed? Yes. But is it preventing you from getting entertainment from the game? Likely not, and therefore not something that has to be fixed.

A lot of the bugs are this way. I challenge you (or anyone) to name any other game breaking bugs (that are not system dependent – i.e. you have a crappy computer that can’t run it for some reason) that currently exist that are not subjective. I am asking because I do not remember seeing anything else in these discussions. I certainly have not experienced any of them in my playing.

Speaking of entertainment, the product that any game developer is selling is in fact entertainment. The vehicle is the game itself. If the end user receives entertainment in a greater or equal equivalent value than the cost of the game, then the developer was successful, and delivered it’s “product”. I started a poll yesterday to get at this very question. You can find it here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=250973).

At the time of this post it had 71 voters. 95.77% believe they have received equal or greater value of entertainment than it cost them to purchase the game. Pretty lopsided in favor of Firaxis delivering on it’s intended goal. (I know that 71 is not statistically significant sample size, and there are potential problems with an internet poll not being a random selection and whatnot, but it does give you a good idea of what the general feeling is).

Don’t get me wrong here – I truly feel that Firaxis should fix the game breaking issues (like OSS) in a quick and timely manner. But that is the end of their obligation. They do not need to fix any subjective bugs regardless of the user desire or if it even is the “right” thing to do.

One can only imagine him standing up at a meeting America's Founding Fathers or in South Africa at a meeting of those fighting Apartheid and reminding them: "Life is unfair, you clueless, insignificant minority. Every other human being who has not raised his or her voice in protest is obviously perfectly satisfied with their lot, why aren't you? We understand that life owes us nothing, why don't you? You need to live in the real world and accept whatever you're given by the almighty powers that be! You should all go home and choose which defective toy to play with -- and be happy about it!"

Umm... I would argue that the people against apartheid were actually in the majority, as whites were outnumbered by at least 10 to 1. That and not all whites were pro-apartheid. Just a thought.

My post was made solely to correct one incorrect statement:

The only reality that we all need to rememeber is that Firaxis has NO legal/contractual obligation to even patch the game once. Once you fork over your hard earned cash for the game - that ends the official relationship you have with them. Period.

Speaking of entertainment, the product that any game developer is selling is in fact entertainment. The vehicle is the game itself. If the end user receives entertainment in a greater or equal equivalent value than the cost of the game, then the developer was successful, and delivered it’s “product”. I started a poll yesterday to get at this very question. You can find it here (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=250973).

At the time of this post it had 71 voters. 95.77% believe they have received equal or greater value of entertainment than it cost them to purchase the game. Pretty lopsided in favor of Firaxis delivering on it’s intended goal. (I know that 71 is not statistically significant sample size, and there are potential problems with an internet poll not being a random selection and whatnot, but it does give you a good idea of what the general feeling is).

I would vote with the majority, a sentiment which I've already expressed a number of times throughout this debate. Again my post was simply a response to your statement concerning Firaxis' obligations. Please don't read anything more into it.

Umm... I would argue that the people against apartheid were actually in the majority,

You've noted the very irony I intended to express.

I would vote with the majority, a sentiment which I've already expressed a number of times throughout this debate. Again my post was simply a response to your statement concerning Firaxis' obligations. Please don't read anything more into it..
I won't. And just to be clear on my side - I was speaking to the wider audience and not just responding to your specific quote that I cited, although that was what prompted me to respond.

You've noted the very irony I intended to express.

My apologies - I did not quite "get it" the first time I read it. This is not an attack (so please don't read it that way) - but you tend to throw in a lot of superfluous details and facts in your posts which in this case obscured the intended irony. I also don't favor posts that are mainly about attacking or degrading another individual, so I tend to have a negative initial reaction to them and am less open to seeing the finer details or underlying point that may be included, even with the disclaimer at the end.

Don’t get me wrong here – I truly feel that Firaxis should fix the game breaking issues (like OSS) in a quick and timely manner. But that is the end of their obligation. They do not need to fix any subjective bugs regardless of the user desire or if it even is the “right” thing to do.


Hmm, from my point of view, something that does not work as described in the Civilopedia or the manual is a malfunction or a bug. If you buy a car that turns left when you turn the steering wheel to the right and vice versa, or that honks the horn now and then without reason, or sometimes shuts down the engine when driving on the highway - you nevertheless basically are able to drive the car. As you put it: “the end user receives entertainment in a greater or equal equivalent value than the cost of the” car. Silly me would try to get it fixed. You’d keep it and think it’s great? ;)
The entertainment industry PR departments obviously have done a great job if some people are getting used to accept and enjoy faulty DVD-Players, game consoles, computers, MP3-players or software/games that need several updates and even then don’t work properly. Other industries usually don’t get away as cheap and easy. Just think about it! Others do – and maybe don’t let them get away that easy. I see no sense in insulting and bashing Firaxis, but a short reminder now and then, that if they want to continue selling, they should not completely forget about customer service might help.
Just my two cents.

Hmm, from my point of view, something that does not work as described in the Civilopedia or the manual is a malfunction or a bug. If you buy a car that turns left when you turn the steering wheel to the right and vice versa, or that honks the horn now and then without reason, or sometimes shuts down the engine when driving on the highway - you nevertheless basically are able to drive the car. As you put it: “the end user receives entertainment in a greater or equal equivalent value than the cost of the” car. Silly me would try to get it fixed. You’d keep it and think it’s great? ;)
The entertainment industry PR departments obviously have done a great job if some people are getting used to accept and enjoy faulty DVD-Players, game consoles, computers, MP3-players or software/games that need several updates and even then don’t work properly. Other industries usually don’t get away as cheap and easy. Just think about it! Others do – and maybe don’t let them get away that easy...


Ok - the car analogy just does not hold up. The primary purpose of a car is safe transportation. If any of the above issues happens, it is a safety issue, and yes - it needs to be fixed. The primary purpose of a game is entertainment. I don't have the possibility of injuring or killing myself or others if the Civilopedia or the manual is wrong.

The same can be said for the medicine analogy listed previously. This and the car example are matters of personal safety, and naturally have a higher degree of needed reliability than a game.

...I see no sense in insulting and bashing Firaxis, but a short reminder now and then, that if they want to continue selling, they should not completely forget about customer service might help.
Just my two cents.

I agree with you totally on this point. My main argument all along has not been that Firaxis is doing well, or doesn't need to improve - because they do. My issues have been with how some people are being irrational in their desires (and how they communicate them) and how that can be counterproductive to what we all want - which is an open and honest flow of communication with the developers that will aid in making a great game even better. We all want a game that is bug free and runs perfectly, we just need to be realistic in what we expect and how we go about communicating that.

Whats the general consensus then ?

Is there going to be 1 last patch ?

Or is 3.13 final ?

but you tend to throw in a lot of superfluous details and facts in your posts which in this case obscured the intended irony.

You've now also spotted my unfortunate tendency to be verbose! :lol:

I believe that there will be one more patch, but like others, have no actual idea as to when that will be.

You've now also spotted my unfortunate tendency to be verbose! :lol:

:beer:

Ok - the car analogy just does not hold up. The primary purpose of a car is safe transportation. If any of the above issues happens, it is a safety issue, and yes - it needs to be fixed. The primary purpose of a game is entertainment.


So just because my life does not depend on it, I have to accept any b*llsh*t I am getting sold???
A bug is annoying. That's the opposite of entertaining. So from a certain point of view a bugged game also misses his purpose (depending on the degree of perfection/imperfection you expect/tolerate). But I don't want to argue. I think in general we ar eon the same side. :)

So just because my life does not depend on it, I have to accept any b*llsh*t I am getting sold???
A bug is annoying. That's the opposite of entertaining. So from a certain point of view a bugged game also misses his purpose (depending on the degree of perfection/imperfection you expect/tolerate). But I don't want to argue. I think in general we ar eon the same side. :)

Yup I think we are. :hatsoff:

lots of words... but nothing new!

if we can't change things we must wait and see
:)

I believe that there will be one more patch, but like others, have no actual idea as to when that will be. :beer:If this is to be the last patch, then all those who feel the game is "broken" should want them to take their time with this, not press for it to come out ASAP!

You can't simultaneously complain that they released the game too soon (which is what you are saying if maintain that it too buggy when it came out) and that they are taking too long to come out with things now, and/or they need to publicize a date and make it theri priority to meet it. that's called having your cake or eating it too.

In the software business there's a well known aphorism: Fast, cheap, and correct? Any combination of two is possible, but not all three.

If this is to be the last patch, then all those who feel the game is "broken" should want them to take their time with this, not press for it to come out ASAP!

I haven't seen *anyone* here press for a patch ASAP. The complaints are about the complete silence from Firaxis about a future patch. A simple, *official* statement to the effect that there will be such a patch at some time would suffice.

If this is to be the last patch, then all those who feel the game is "broken" should want them to take their time with this, not press for it to come out ASAP!


In the software business there's a well known aphorism: Fast, cheap, and correct? Any combination of two is possible, but not all three.

Unfortunately they didn't manage any of them it wasn't cheap civ IV cost me £100 it wasn't fast and as supplied it doesn't work on either system I have, despite hours of my time and even more time from solver etc it still has a game breaking bug the MP oss, I've given up on firaxis & take 2 as they can't even be bothered to communicate so in future i wont be paying for any product from either of them until i know it works (torrents are your friend) and before anyone says piracy is wrong normally I'd agree with you but they have had my money and supplied nothing in return so they cant morally complain when i get they product for nothing later

Simon

Warned! - We don't allow discussion of piracy, in any form.

I have to say, what a ...<Snip>... long post and all for nothing.
If you are not happy with the game, i could advice you to do like i do, use some basics XML, the work of the pro modder and do your civ4 of your dream.
For example take the last unofficial patch, Varietas, and Revolution and you got an hell of game ^^ ( My friend have linked all those mods and its rock!)

I think Firaxis made an hell of a Job, and i thank them for that ... the game is playable and it can be modified, change and customized, what can i say.

Regards,

Please don't use the language. It's against forum rules and isn't needed to make your point.

I was at a seminar yesterday where a speaker on corporate public relations said, in the context of responding to allegations of corporate misconduct:

10-15% of the people will hate you no matter what you do or say.
10-15% of the people will love you no matter what you do or say.
The rest will decide if you are a villain or not based on all of the available information. Accordingly, your concern should be the 70-80% of the people in the middle.

This thread seems a good proof of her point.

Personally, I don't think Firaxis has done a good job of keeping its customer base advised or responding to concerns and complaints. I certainly understand the difficulties of software development pointed out by various posters. This is mostly a public relations issue and failure. An occasional update on the official CIV IV website, or on CFC and Apolyton, on the status of patches would have (and probably still would) work wonders. The majority in the middle would be satisified with a target date and, if it gets close and that target date isn't likely to be met, a note in advance that the target date needs to be extended and why.

I was at a seminar yesterday where a speaker on corporate public relations said, in the context of responding to allegations of corporate misconduct:

10-15% of the people will hate you no matter what you do or say.
10-15% of the people will love you no matter what you do or say.
The rest will decide if you are a villain or not based on all of the available information. Accordingly, your concern should be the 70-80% of the people in the middle.

This thread seems a good proof of her point.

Personally, I don't think Firaxis has done a good job of keeping its customer base advised or responding to concerns and complaints. I certainly understand the difficulties of software development pointed out by various posters. This is mostly a public relations issue and failure. An occasional update on the official CIV IV website, or on CFC and Apolyton, on the status of patches would have (and probably still would) work wonders. The majority in the middle would be satisified with a target date and, if it gets close and that target date isn't likely to be met, a note in advance that the target date needs to be extended and why.

Wise words, my friend.... I'm in the same boat as you.

I'll third that.

I think the real problem- is Securom. They charge companies for patches, and this reduces the frequency of patches. Other devs has used this as an excuse before, so I'm sure that it is part of the problem.

If Firaxis didn't get gouged by a third-rate malware company (I have no problem with certain copy protection schemes, such as Stardock's, but I do with most.) there would likely be more patches.

If I was Firaxis: here's what I'd do:
1) Switch to Stardock's Game Service- it's likely cheaper then what they're paying Securom- in fact, the publicity would probably make Stardock not charge much of anything. (I dislike Steam but that's an option as well)

2) Release Beta patches on an "as-is, unsupported" basis. You'll get QC done quicker and establish better goodwill.

I know I would likely not play the game much if it wasn't for the unofficial patches, but I do find it sad that most of the effective QC work so far has been done by fans and not Firaxis.

I think the real problem- is Securom. They charge companies for patches, and this reduces the frequency of patches. Other devs has used this as an excuse before, so I'm sure that it is part of the problem.

If Firaxis didn't get gouged by a third-rate malware company (I have no problem with certain copy protection schemes, such as Stardock's, but I do with most.) there would likely be more patches.

If I was Firaxis: here's what I'd do:
1) Switch to Stardock's Game Service- it's likely cheaper then what they're paying Securom- in fact, the publicity would probably make Stardock not charge much of anything. (I dislike Steam but that's an option as well)

2) Release Beta patches on an "as-is, unsupported" basis. You'll get QC done quicker and establish better goodwill.

I know I would likely not play the game much if it wasn't for the unofficial patches, but I do find it sad that most of the effective QC work so far has been done by fans and not Firaxis.

stardock would scare off far more people than it would fix problems

as-is unsupported patches would irritate even more people with new bugs

IMO

Not being an expert in computers, I'm a little wary of private patches and prefer to wait for the official ones (though the fact that so many people use them has made me less wary of them) if only because then I can undo it if necessary. So I wasn't happy to hear that a new patch made things worse in some way and have decided to avoid installing BtS (though I have it) until the new patch comes out.

But I would be happy with a lot of little patches. I know trying to make everything perfect in one swoop is difficult. Is it just not practical to release patches in this way?

But I would be happy with a lot of little patches. I know trying to make everything perfect in one swoop is difficult. Is it just not practical to release patches in this way?

The problem with that ( like it was previously said in this mile long thread ) is that if you didn't connected your computer for a day to the web, you simply would be dessincronized of the rest of the civ community. For a normal single player gamer that is not very relevant, but for anyone that plays MPs or that have some kind of online game ( like the SG or the GotM ) that would be pretty bad. And , besides that, it would be more dificult and expensive for the game producer to do a big number of small patches than a few big ones.

stardock would scare off far more people than it would fix problems

as-is unsupported patches would irritate even more people with new bugs

IMO


If there were Both
as-is unsupported 'Beta' patches
AND
Official supported patches

then It would be ideal... essentially because that is what we have in the Civ community... but the 'as-is unsupported' patches aren't done by Firaxis

If they were, then the 3.13 + "Bhurics" would be getting closer and closer to version 3.29 and Bhuric would be getting paid (even if it was only one day a week.)

as-is unsupported patches would irritate even more people with new bugs

IMO

Solver and Bhruic's as-is unsupported patches didn't irritate many people. In fact, I'd say we were all grateful for fixing firaxis' stuffups!

Stardock is really not the answer - however good the actual patches to Gal Civ 2 are, the patching system itself is the worst I've ever encountered. I don't like unnecesary third party programs, and Stardock is little more than spyware. It also doesn't work very well in terms of actually getting the game patched, requiring about 30 times the time and effort that the existing Civ system does, and is bug ridden itself.

I was at a seminar yesterday where a speaker on corporate public relations said, in the context of responding to allegations of corporate misconduct:

10-15% of the people will hate you no matter what you do or say.
10-15% of the people will love you no matter what you do or say.
The rest will decide if you are a villain or not based on all of the available information. Accordingly, your concern should be the 70-80% of the people in the middle.

This thread seems a good proof of her point.

Personally, I don't think Firaxis has done a good job of keeping its customer base advised or responding to concerns and complaints. I certainly understand the difficulties of software development pointed out by various posters. This is mostly a public relations issue and failure. An occasional update on the official CIV IV website, or on CFC and Apolyton, on the status of patches would have (and probably still would) work wonders. The majority in the middle would be satisified with a target date and, if it gets close and that target date isn't likely to be met, a note in advance that the target date needs to be extended and why.

Well put. One of the main criticism of Firaxis has been their total lack of communication with the community. Even in the recent 3.13 fiasco there was no real communication, since Alexman was acting in an unofficial capacity, and in any case provided zero accurate information on when the patch would be released. That was worse than useless - I could have posted random messages every week or so that the patch would be out next week, and it would have been both as accurate and as helpful. The change list was the only piece of information we actually got that was of value.

I have to agree Firaxis ought to give an official ETA, and updates BEFORE it passes if it will not be met, either on the currently pointless official site, or here and at Apolyton. Not doing that just annoys everyone - and the purpose of patches is after all to maintain a good reputation in the community. They can hardly complain at being criticised for poor communication when all we get is "there will be a patch out before the end of time" buried in one thread.

As to not giving an ETA because you don't think you can meet it - when they get free choice of the time frame, and a certain amount of flexibility if you telll us what's going on, again they deserve all the criticism they get, as that level of poor planning is plain pathetic.

The only thing I've found unnecessarily slow on SDC has been downloading and installing the heightmaps. No idea why.

It definitely isn't spyware, since you can open it, check for patch, then close it. It doesn't leave any traces on your system anymore. (It used to in GC1 days, but hasn't in the last two years- they heard complaints and fixed it)

Honestly, I have no idea what you're talking about.

As for Firaxis- due to Stardock and a lesser extent paradox- I expect that level of customer service now. While Firaxis's level of service may be "good enough" for most people, it's been substandard to what I expect.

Is that enough to make me stop buying? Honestly, no. The games themselves when fixed are good, and fans fix them well enough to my taste. That said, I'm going to wait a week now in future. Firaxis did lose my absolute trust in terms of reliability, though not to the extent Sega's PC division/CA did with MTW2. If you want bad service, look at that game. Firaxis I still trust to make good games, just with poor QC. Thankfully the fans can do Firaxis's job better then Firaxis can.

(Sega's console division is different- VF5 is a bucket of fun and 360 owners should get that game- best 360 game of the year.)

Not being an expert in computers, I'm a little wary of private patches and prefer to wait for the official ones (though the fact that so many people use them has made me less wary of them) if only because then I can undo it if necessary. So I wasn't happy to hear that a new patch made things worse in some way and have decided to avoid installing BtS (though I have it) until the new patch comes out.

But I would be happy with a lot of little patches. I know trying to make everything perfect in one swoop is difficult. Is it just not practical to release patches in this way?

I was like that with Solver's patch. I didn't download his patch to 3.02 because I am not an computer expert. Plus, I didn't have a big problem with BtS v.302. However, I decided to try Bhruic's patch. I have 3.13 with Bhruic's 1.09 patch. It wasn't difficult to install, and I guess now they even have an installer with it.

As far as a lot of little patches go, I assume based on what I've read that it would be too expensive to keep coming up with little patches, and thus a few larger ones are more cost effective.

Long ago, in post #158 (first third of this thread)...
Oh really? By your statement if the masses claim someone is guilty of a crime than they are guilty, even if the evidence states otherwise. Truth and fact are not derived from the masses opinion.
(sic)

Methos,

The person (T.A Jones) that you are criticizing is not necessarily suggesting mob rule governs reality. I think that when it comes to evaluating testing, especially in PC games, the final verdict does belong to the masses... and you should not mock that poster.

Because another name for the masses -- the installed base.

<snip>
- O

Methos is speaking truth.

Are you suggesting that the tiny fraction of vocal critics who post here actually constitute "the installed base" of this game? I think you overestimate their importance by a huge factor.

Methos is speaking truth.

Are you suggesting that the tiny fraction of vocal critics who post here actually constitute "the installed base" of this game? I think you overestimate their importance by a huge factor.

to be honest, I'd suggest that the vast majority of the people that purchased Civ4/Warlords/BtS have moved on to other games. Such is the short attention span of consumers in the modern world.

Those that are left using this software are the ones more likely to discover bugs, especially dumb bugs like the missing culture icons and the spy issue (from 3.02).

If Firaxis doesn't want negative word of mouth to affect the sales of their next-gen products, they would be wise to better support their current generation.

After all, how many people did it take before Activision was unable to sell grand strategy games and decided to stick with Spongebob FPS games?

The fact I was openly mocked by the civ4 mod is not unusual but to have a well respected civ3 mod come to defend his actions on a open Fireaxis commications line only days back from his visit to thier company Headquarters (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=6147791&postcount=6) is somewhat more troubling for me. :confused:


THank you @Duuk and @occam for defending this realty so elequety in my defence. Occum especially I am truly impressed the resounding certainity and diplomatic rebuttels that resonate from your words here and across the forum (example)

Powerslave,

Thank you for your reply, and your precis of the recent releases by Firaxis.

I am sorry to say that we seem to disagree as to what qualifies as evidence of design or intent.

Some of the things you mention could be further symptoms of poor implementation instead, like the broken Gandhi.

Some of the things you claim about the market in general would certainly require a further reference. I did play SMAC but I did not know that it was notorious for selling poorly. Is Firaxis on record as regarding SMAC as a failure?

I have some skepticism that you are accurately reading the situation due to to the risk of confirmation bias (you have displayed a remarkably disparaging attitude towards one side of this issue). Have you taken any steps to guard against this? If not, I can't help but discard your anecdotal and inexpert insight into the developer's strategies.

============

This could go on forever, you presenting your 'deductions' about designer intent, and me debunking them as poorly reasoned or unofficial, but the cycle stops here. I'm not debunking the next round. I feel confident that anyone who has understood my previous points has learned the process and can carry it out for themselves.


I posted this to show my confidence in your sound reasoning and example of the type of great character I am lucky to have in my corner this particularly most important instance.


I worked in a fancy hotel resturant were they taught us to listen to that one custumer who is taking the time to complain. Usually they represent a much larger silent audience/patrionage who shares this veiw but will instead simply move on I was told. LIke @Duuk said, they go somewhere else and all the while tell anyone who listens the problems they ran into.
Is it that hard to assume this has merit and can apply elsewhere aswell? Surley not in fact I bet many are in agreence but how many of those will actually speak up ;)

Is it that hard to believe this can passover to other industys? Its funny to hear someone suggest 'Well its only these loud annoying minority on the forums who complain. The ones who don't know about civfan must all be loving it (bts)'

That's a strawman argument. No one said that everyone not on these forums is loving the game.

Further, you don't speak for the masses. Nor do these forums represent them. Therefore you are in no positition to claim what the masses think or say, which is clearly what you are trying to do in the part quoted in post #158. In fact, you aren't even in the majority on this forum. It's one thing to speak about your personal gripes, it's another to claim to speak for everyone.

Finally, on the internet, there is almost always a vocal minority that is openly hostile about anything. That's true for things other than computer games, check some of the imdb threads for movie examples. Having a bunch of people screaming "X sucks" is entirely too common. No rational person would conclude that every X product does suck. Nor should anyone conclude that about BTS based on the vocal minority here.

(Please note, that I am not saying there are no issues with BTS, or that people with constructive criticism aren't being helpful - they are. People making baseless accusations such as this individual poster are who my comments are aimed at)

The fact I was openly mocked

You were not "openly mocked". Your false statement was called out as a false statement. If this bothers you, you need only refrain from making such unsubstatiated comments in the future.

Bh

That's a strawman argument. No one said that everyone not on these forums is loving the game.
What is? ;) I must have agreed with you :) or, you never gave me enough time to rephrase and grammer check my final post like I do after putting it up momentarly. Just look at your posts lenght and time then compare to mine after the 'just edited' line ( my bad habit/pref sorry for inconvinence)

You were not "openly mocked". Your false statement was called out as a false statement. If this bothers you, you need only refrain from making such unsubstatiated comments in the future.


WHatever you say boy :D Besides, who made you the judge. <deleted>
If I didn't have thick skin like I hope you do, I would have been long gone from this side monthes ago. Sure im a disgruntled with issues over my paid product but I wear a flame retardent suit when dealing with you fans. I always want whats best for the game when I head into the flame.

Guys who don't like hearing the hurtful version of the facts are free to ignore or dispute. Just keep the ignorance in check if your modding the sceane. I think thats what the poster means. I apploud how he does a better job of touching on it. Why you failed to mention what he said and instead quoted what I repeated I don't understand, or mybe I do lol)

Long ago, in post #158 (first third of this thread)...

(sic)

Methos,

The person (T.A Jones) that you are criticizing is not necessarily suggesting mob rule governs reality. I think that when it comes to evaluating testing, especially in PC games, the final verdict does belong to the masses... and you should not mock that poster.

For me I see what he is suggesting from all of his posts can be sum up with " Civ4 sucks and Civ3 rules".

Sorry, T.A, you were not "openly mocked". You made the statement: The masses say theres no testin then thats that truth. and were called on the obvious untruth.

The larger problem with this thread has become discussion of moderators and their actions. Read the Forum Rules (http://forums.civfanatics.com/forumrules.php). If anyone else has any further comments to make on us/them, do it via PM.

I think some aspects of this discussion are being misunderstood. And some posters statements are either being wrongly lumped into a 'whiner' vs 'fan boy' category; or there are varying degrees of opinions within any given stereotype. I think it is a combination of both, and more.

And I think the stereotyping, and the dismissal of an individuals points due a perceived stereotyped point of view is pure folly. I'm one to have stepped into that folly by speaking of fan boys in regards to their reactions to Civ criticism. I see this phenomena in many posts here. Discussions start out well and then quickly degrade once the label of whiners and fan boys are brought into it.

One of the apparent misunderstandings here is that some of us say that we think the majority here share our opinion. I don't see that. To say, like I have, that many here have expressed frustration or outright displeasure with the game is very different from saying that most people feel exactly the same as I do. Across these forums I see expressed anger and frustration about the game as a whole, as well as just individual elements of it. I also see much frustration with the patching process and the lack of firaxian communication. From the year 2002 to the present I see a discernible rise in expressed dissatisfaction. I see scores of critical posts here made by different posters. These criticisms are greatly varied and they range from people being fairly content with the game as is yet still critical of the patching process; all the way to the extreme of posting they will not buy another firaxian product or will wait the long wait for the games final patch.

To say that the dissatisfied are a small minority is as erroneous as saying that the dissatisfied are a majority. Just look around the forums with a critical eye and you will see just how widespread and varied the civ criticisms are.

I really wonder what the ones who haven't heard of this forum think about the last two Civ Patches. The Steam-caused one, while not Firaxis's fault- was unfinished.

3.13 has a host of obvious bugs. I could imagine the players getting pretty disappointed.

I wish Firaxis had a 3.19 or so patch that fixed the blatant problems, or just made Bhruric's an official patch while working on the real patch.

I'm just glad that the resources are out there to fix Firaxis's messups ourselves and Bhruric made it.

And I think the stereotyping, and the dismissal of an individuals points due a perceived stereotyped point of view is pure folly. I'm one to have stepped into that folly by speaking of fan boys in regards to their reactions to Civ criticism. I see this phenomena in many posts here. Discussions start out well and then quickly degrade once the label of whiners and fan boys are brought into it.

I think you're neglecting to take into consideration posting style. This particular post of yours was quite moderate and well written. But I'm sure you're aware of many other posts you've made for which that hasn't been the case. The thread in the Warlords forum that required the title change would be a good example.

I'm not pointing a finger at you, or putting you down in any fashion, I'm just pointing out that it's heated comments/statements like that that tend to cause the friction (and this is true on both sides). If someone comes in here and says "3.13 has some serious bugs, and I hope Firaxis will rectify them in a timely fashion", I'd easily agree with them. If they come in and say "3.13 sucks, Firaxis doesn't know wtf they are doing", then I'd certainly not agree with them. Unfortunately we tend to get some vocal people posting in the latter fashion. A lot of us take issue with those sorts of posts.

The other issue I'd bring up is one where a lot of posters tend to address Firaxis as a whole, instead of a collection of individuals. To use the ubiquitous "car" analogy, if a line of Ford cars happened to be particularily bad, and people were complaining about them, who would you hold responsible? The CEO of the company? Or some guy who works on the production line?

The Firaxians that we deal with in here are, for the most part, analogous to the line workers. They aren't the ones making the "release/don't release" decisions. They aren't the ones making the financing decisions. They aren't the ones responsible for ensuring proper QA. So it's annoying to see people taking out there justified frustration on these people who aren't in a position to do anything about it. To fall back to the analogy, complaining to the line worker isn't going to make the cars any better.

If you actually want to do something constructive, write some letters to Take Two. Express your dissatisfaction. That will be useful. But general "Firaxis sucks" type complaints a non-Firaxis, non-Take Two forum are not.

Bh

I really wonder what the ones who haven't heard of this forum think about the last two Civ Patches. The Steam-caused one, while not Firaxis's fault- was unfinished.

3.13 has a host of obvious bugs. I could imagine the players getting pretty disappointed.

A few weeks ago I suggested to my father to install both the official and Bhruic's patch which he did. When I spoke to him again recently he asked me what the patches actualy changed. To my surprise, he didn't really notice any differences from the original release.

I think these forums act like some kind of 'awareness multiplier' for bugs. With the number and level of players on these boards, nearly all bugs will be identified very quickly and become common knowledge.

In contrast, players 'isolated' from these boards either won't notice problems at all or fail to identify them as bugs. Instead they might think they just don't understand the game correctly.

I also suspect that non-fanatics tend to take bugs a little less serious. ;)

For me I see what he is suggesting from all of his posts can be sum up with " Civ4 sucks and Civ3 rules".

The 'Smidden' AGjenda ;)

You want Examples of bad postman ship? Watch the blind axe grind we see go on here. This sums it up.
Only because civ3 cities are packed as tight as a can of sardines. This strategy isn't as valid (thankfully) in Civ4.. .

IN Response NIcley refuted with "freedom to spread out cities retort" (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?p=6095622#post6095622) ;)

But wait!! not two days later he comes at someone else! Again, with the same garbage but this time sniffing out an CIv4 vs Civ3 thread way over in on OT thread! :crazyeye:

5) Tiny Maps/Inability to have a large empire

Max 10 cities if you're lucky on Huge in civ 4 before warring and with the standard 11 civs. In civ 3, you could reliably get upwards of 20 cities on huge with the standard 16 civs with spread out cities.[/
"Here I come to save the day!!" The ever so loved Hero and staunch defender of civ4, Smiddy hits em with a knockout! :splat: :D :

the reason you got so many cities in civ3 is it was a good strategy to pack your cities as tight as a can of sardines.

I specifically stated spread out to prevent this kind of interpretation, yet some people clearly like ignoring certain words and phrases to suit their agenda

Comon Smiddy who you trying to fool here? WHats your reasoning boil down to?Hey, Atleast we can say 'his' was the 'fair' assesment :)

Heres a lil more sum up of only Smidlees Finest..going back less then half a page lol

You got to make diplomacy somewhat against the player or the game will be a cakewalk where the player has pretty much control over the AI civs just like civ3.

Really!? The idea you can take cities one by one without any loses doesn't sound overpowering to you? Also BTS has spies so no need for your forces to be 50% cats. Of course you can win without...

Warned! - Flaming. An entire post specifically attacking another member? :nono:

[...] If someone comes in here and says "3.13 has some serious bugs, and I hope Firaxis will rectify them in a timely fashion", I'd easily agree with them.
I think, everybody would agree with this. Except for a small, but countable minority who does not accept any kind of criticism - and these people are around here.

If they come in and say "3.13 sucks, Firaxis doesn't know wtf they are doing", then I'd certainly not agree with them. Unfortunately we tend to get some vocal people posting in the latter fashion. A lot of us take issue with those sorts of posts.
A quite unpolite statement, I agree. Nevertheless, sometimes one may really wonder what is going on there.
If the fanbase is told for weeks that a patch is in the queue and it would not be released yet because the QA department is checking it, and finally this patch comes out and contains errors which are obvious from the very first moment on, then I would say that you may have some doubts.

The other issue I'd bring up is one where a lot of posters tend to address Firaxis as a whole, instead of a collection of individuals. To use the ubiquitous "car" analogy, if a line of Ford cars happened to be particularily bad, and people were complaining about them, who would you hold responsible? The CEO of the company? Or some guy who works on the production line?

The Firaxians that we deal with in here are, for the most part, analogous to the line workers. They aren't the ones making the "release/don't release" decisions. They aren't the ones making the financing decisions. They aren't the ones responsible for ensuring proper QA. So it's annoying to see people taking out there justified frustration on these people who aren't in a position to do anything about it. To fall back to the analogy, complaining to the line worker isn't going to make the cars any better.
Well, let's be honest.
You have a neighbour, John Miller, being a worker at a Ford plant. Your new car (a Ford model) for which you have saved your money for quite some time, actually is broken from the beginning. Every now and then the brakes don't work, the wipers don't work if coming into contact with water and so on.
What do you do?
Do you meet Johnny and tell him: "Well, actually I am quite unsatisfied with the decision of your former CEO who in [today minus 5 years] decided to cut costs and go for cheaper suppliers. In addition, I am unsatisfied with the decision to outsource quality inspection to this Indian company in XXX."?

No, you don't. You tell him: "Listen, Johnny, you are producing quite some crap!" Even more you do so ("you" being a general statement, not adressed to you personally, of course!) if Johnny Miller advertised the new model months in advance and happily collected the congratulations from all the neighbourhood which was based on some pre-release test drive reports.
You just adress him as being part of the company.

Now, let's assume that your new Ford car runs like a charm. You can pick up girls, you come to Germany and outrace the new Mercedes and everything is just wonderful. What do you do now?
Do you meet John Miller again and tell him: "Well, Johnny, most probably you have had nothing to do with the fact that the new model has become such a great car. Therefore, just wipe that stupid grin out of your face, because it has been the decision of the board to let it go to market. And next time, please take the earlier bus on Mondays, because I would like to ensure that other customers get the same quality regardless of the production day of the car!"

No, you don't. Instead, you are inviting him to a barbecue because you want to show him the car and have some beers and some nice chat about it.

I think, you got the picture.

A few weeks ago I suggested to my father to install both the official and Bhruic's patch which he did. When I spoke to him again recently he asked me what the patches actualy changed. To my surprise, he didn't really notice any differences from the original release.

I think these forums act like some kind of 'awareness multiplier' for bugs. With the number and level of players on these boards, nearly all bugs will be identified very quickly and become common knowledge.

In contrast, players 'isolated' from these boards either won't notice problems at all or fail to identify them as bugs. Instead they might think they just don't understand the game correctly.

I also suspect that non-fanatics tend to take bugs a little less serious. ;)

This is a failed "experiment". You had him install Bhruics. Having him install JUST 3.13 he would notice the differences. And I doubt what he does notice, he will be happy about.

This is a failed "experiment".

I didn't really mean this as an experiment, it's just an anecdote of something I personally experienced that made me wonder how more casual gamers without access to CFC might feel about the bugs in BtS in general.

You had him install Bhruics. Having him install JUST 3.13 he would notice the differences. And I doubt what he does notice, he will be happy about.

Well, maybe. But I was thinking more about those people who don't visit this site and who didn't patch the game at all. IMO the difference between 3.00 and (3.13 + Bhruic) is considerably bigger than between 3.00 and just 3.13. Personally, I wouldnt want to be playing without the patches. Still, for my father, who I substituted as a model for the casual, non-fanatic player, the difference was not noticeable.

I didn't really mean this as an experiment, it's just an anecdote of something I personally experienced that made me wonder how more casual gamers without access to CFC might feel about the bugs in BtS in general.


Can't tell about BTS because I knew the bug before playing. But I noticed the overuse of south american Civs in C3C III after about five or six games. I also noticed the city list getting messed up when placing build orders there (which ist still unfixed in Vanilla 1.74) after about five or six games. So I think, one really does not need to be an expert or deeply experienced to discover a bug.

Are you suggesting that the tiny fraction of vocal critics who post here actually constitute "the installed base" of this game? I think you overestimate their importance by a huge factor.

Padma,

Thank you for the considerate reply.

You propose that the masses have not really spoken. That is possibly true (see below) but certainly does not vindicate Methos if true.

Methos's attack was most certainly NOT an attempt to dispute the verdict of the masses. Methos was instead attacking the VALUE of the verdict of the masses, equating it to mob rule in a legal/judicial system. A very different proposition, one that I have much more difficulty accepting.

Here's how it breaks down for me, am I crazy?:

Occam's axiom: if we truly know the verdict of the masses when it comes to QA in PC games, that is of some value.

Methos's proposition: listening to the verdict of the masses is analogous to mob rule.

Padma's Incompleteness theorem: the current debate represents a minority and the verdict of the masses is incompletely known.

Padma's theorem, even if true, doesn't come close to proving the Methos proposition.

==========

However, just for closure, I am willing to debate with you that the masses HAVE spoken, simultaneously with my debate with Methos about the value of the verdict of the masses.

Ironically, just for the record, I have the feeling that Methos is part of the masses! (You might be, too, but I have too few posts of yours to assess it.) I may have misjudged it, but I interpret Methos's position as that the patch is needed but that the silence* from Firaxis is not all that alarming. Heck, can't we add Firaxis to the masses, too? They think a patch is needed...

I think that the minority criticism that Padma raises is valid for the part of the community excoriating Firaxis for the silence/lull, but looking over this thread I don't see anyone credibly maintaining that no patch is needed; at the very least most people will need Bhruic's patch; and with respect to multi-player, there is no debate something official is needed. (Some persons have claimed that they themselves are fine and don't acutely feel a need for a patch, but when pressed they all seem to acknowledge that the current state does require some patching.)

- Occam

* 'silence' is not at all accurate... how about 'ex-silence'? 'lull'?

I wish other games companys had the same desire as Valve to get their games finished correctly.

Look at the recently release of Team Fortress 2, a game that whilst in it's short public beta was more polished and complete than a lot of "finished" games that get released these days. With all of the bug reports and feedback from the vastly increased beta pool they were able to patch even more bugs and make minor balance changes, with updates at their height 2 times a week. More than a month after official release and the last update was only on wednesday, and I can predict more updates until Valve have their product almost flawless.

I suppose that desire to get things right even if it's costing them comes from the fact Valve don't have shareholders breathing down their necks wondering why money is still being spent on a released product.

Padma's Incompleteness theorem: the current debate represents a minority and the verdict of the masses is incompletely known.


All polls or surveys as instruments of market research are based on minorities. Nevertheless they are used. Many companies spend lots of money to find out what people think about their products. Even if it's an unrepresentative minority of grumblers who come here and post their opinion that should be a hint for a company that there MIGHT be some dissatisfaction also with the unvocal masses. As far as the bugs of BtS are concerned, this opinion from my point of view is legitimate. A company should take that serious. If too much dissatisfaction is ignored for too long, we don't need mob rule - because buyers will vote for or against them at the shop counter. It's as easy as that. Business administration first term. 'nough said.

Firaxis can't patch the hole in my heart :(...

JK, but hurry up will ye?

Still, for my father, who I substituted as a model for the casual, non-fanatic player, the difference was not noticeable.

From my experience that casual, non-CFC player, (like me before Civ 4) would "Check for automatic updates" inside the game options and thus would end up with 3.13. And would not have Bhruics. Substituting you father in for this is not the same thing. As he has Bhruics, which is NOT a casual, non-CFC player.

To continue the subject of grumbler's "experiment":

As one can see, I am relatively new to this forum. I think I started when I learned of the BtS expansion. I had played Civ III with all the expansions, and Civ IV and Warlords before knowing of this forum. (I actually started with Call to Power II, which I guess wasn't really a Civ game. I learned that in a review of the game online. Never heard of Civ before then.) I have enjoyed the games from the my first purchase, hence my continued support of the products. It wasn't until I started reading this forum that I learned that the games were "broken". I enjoyed the game as is. If I had never heard of this forum and purchased BtS, I am sure I would not have thought some of the things that are/were bugs were bugs, but just part of the game. For example, I would not have thought the poisoned water supply was a bug, just a part of the game (I play Epic speed, not Marathon). Now, I admit, I am not good at the game. I do well on Noble, but have tried a couple of Prince games and have gotten sqaushed. Until Bhruic's patch, I had never used the unofficial patches, only the official ones which the game updates too. I also think I should note, in fairness, that I never updated to 3.03 because of everything I read on these forums, so I have no experience with that patch.

My point here is that I agree that the many casual players won't notice the bugs, and/or like grumbler stated, might just think they don't understand the game. I will continue to play the game, and enjoy it, until the next patch comes out, be it next week, next month, or next year. If there is a Civ V, I will have to decide if I want to go with that. I enjoy this game so much, I find it hard to imagine it getting better or my getting bored with it. But, who knows.

If I had never heard of this forum and purchased BtS, I am sure I would not have thought some of the things that are/were bugs were bugs, but just part of the game. For example, I would not have thought the poisoned water supply was a bug, just a part of the game (I play Epic speed, not Marathon).
I agree with this part to some extent. But I always critic games I buy. I hold issues with almost every game I own and enjoy. Maybe they are bugs, maybe they are features - nevertheless, I think they should be changed. This is natural to me. I have always done it. It is much like a review I read in Game Informer Magazine a few months back. The reviewer stated "media inspires other media". Which I agree with. When I play Rollercoaster Tycoon 1, I say "All these themes need more diversity. Where is the Ferris Wheel? Where are the 'dollar to play' games?" etc. So yes, I can nit pick a game with the best of them. But that does not mean I am incapable of enjoying them too.

As for the poisoning water supply, I too figured it was a feature. (And I play marathon) I watched size 8 cities be reduced to 1-3 population cities from 1 single poisoned water supply. I personally just thought "Wow, its extremely cheap to get rid of that much population." And I didn't care for it, but I just accepted it. Now, IMO it seems too expensive though to do pretty much nothing with "poison water supply mission". The part I liked about the bugged version was it was worth the EP (and then some) but it also made early health resources invaluable. As well, it made the expansive trait and UB's that grant health scores worth more.

My main gripe with 3.03 was the excessive use of spies by the AIs. It was just downright annoying that every turn I caught about 2-4 spies in my territory on average and a city would get poisoned. I imagined an invisible army of spies of all the AIs heading into my territory and it seemed as if the AIs were all making spies mostly and all targeting me. And I wouldn't even be the point leader or even the guy that had the most potential for wreaking havoc on our continent.

Until Bhruic's patch, I had never used the unofficial patches,
Same here. But also I bought BTS around the a couple days before 3.13's release and hadn't gotten around to downloading any patches.

only the official ones which the game updates too.
Which is my point. Most of us the players that play BTS that are not forum visitors have no unofficial patch to fall back on. And I would bet that they uninstall and reinstall the game to get rid of 3.13. As I can't see how some of the bugs added in by 3.13 would be seen as neat gameplay changes.

My point here is that I agree that the many casual players won't notice the bugs, and/or like grumbler stated, might just think they don't understand the game.
I think it will be a case of the latter myself. Which isn't good nor acceptable. If you don't understand a game, you are more likely to play one you do understand. The most common form of this with 3.13 why can I not see culture if there is a cultural victory?

Having browsed through the last postings, I get the impression that many of us (the posters in this forum) do forget how the "normal" player may act.

I remember games in the past, which obviously were broken or at least suffered from major bugs. Now, since I did buy these games, there was some kind of interest in playing them.
Nevertheless, if a short investigation in the internet did not reveal any quick option to improve these games (aka get rid of the bugs, fix the broken elements) I just quit (quitted???) to play them at all.

So far, so bad. The company had earned their money anyway, as I already had bought the game. So what?

I remember that for some of these games sequels were issued. I saw them on the shelves and didn't give them a second look at all. Why not? Because I remembered that the first game did not prove to be of value for me.

Now, I am just an individual and others may react differently. Yet, I don't think that I am THAT individual, that no other will act in the same way.

At the end of the day missing support for the product will mean missing sales later on. To which degree is had to estimate, but support will pay off.
Even more in the times of the internet, when information are spread so quickly.
the fact that neither Firaxis nor Take2 put any effort into their internet pages anymore (as far as BtS is concerned) seems to be a major misunderstanding of the market reactions to me.

Heres a lil more sum up of only Smidlees Finest..going back less then half a page lol

I still stand by the fact you have to make the diplomacy some against the player to make diplimacy even close to be challenging. I like civ4 diplomacy better since civ3 was too much in the players favor. Also in civ3 normally you have more cities because it a good strategy to packed your cities very tight. In fact one of the mistakes I made when I first got civ3 was to spread my cities too far like I did in civ2. Civ3 corruption idea was to discourage "the civ with the most cities wins" but in the end it didn't work out that way.
***********
Back on topic; Stardock was been very open to the public and to me clearly went the extra mile with Galciv2 yet it doesn't still seem to slow down people complaints. For example a post from Galciv2 forum : Hm. Been a while. Maybe a week or two after this game was released is when I bought it on the advice of some forum mates over at BioWare.com's Off Topic forums. It was fun at first, mainly because you have more breathing room than Civ IV and you can build your own ships and what-not, but to be honest the game was a little shoddy. Sadly, it still is. Don't know how many times this game has been patched, but it seems to have been a lot. So why does nothing seem different? The controls are still a mess, the AI are still morons, the tech tree still doesn't tell you anything so you're researching blindly. That's only a few things I can think of at the moment, but there's plenty more. Still, the burdensome controls and micromanagement coupled with the simplistic tech tree (each tech gives you a building that takes longer to build and gives slightly more, or a weapon that does the same damage but takes up a little less space, etc.)... makes for a very sad experience if you ask me. I'm sad to see that all of the great ideas that were asked for and posted before I stopped playing... none of them were added, and it's been a long, long time. Why did they ask, then? To makes us feel like we actually have a voice here? Bah! When the hell is this game going to be worth the money I paid for it? So I can understand why someone from Firaxis sees responding to those on the internet a waste of time.

As I see it, the really important topic is something that has gotten thrown to the wayside here in everyobdy's quest to win arguments... :rolleyes:

That question is "when will Firaxis come out with the next BtS patch?"

That question is "when will Firaxis come out with the next BtS patch?"

Yes, this is a good question. Let me see how to answer it:

When I look in the readme file of their last semi-patch 1.22 for Civ 3 Conquest, I can see the date March 2004. As they try to give a good service to their customers, they should work now for about 3 1/2 years to complete this patch. When they are finished with it, they start with the patch for Civ 4 BTS. This is the logical sequence for two companies (2K and Firaxis) that do a good service to their customers, that they first clear their older debts.

As the final complete patch for C3C isn´t there, the answer to your question should be: At least 3,5 years + x . :cool:

So there should be no reason for whining by some Civ 4 BTS fans for a fixed patch for BTS. If you start whining just now, it could be, that you don´t have any liquid in your eyes to form tears in 3,5 years (+x). :)

Nice piece of sarcasm, Civinator ;) . But unfortunately you have your fair share of reason... :cry:

Nice piece of sarcasm, Civinator ;) . But unfortunately you have your fair share of reason... :cry:

Thank you for understanding my post.

I still stand by the fact you have to make the diplomacy some against the player to make diplimacy even close to be challenging. I like civ4 diplomacy better since civ3 was too much in the players favor. Also in civ3 normally you have more cities because it a good strategy to packed your cities very tight. In fact one of the mistakes I made when I first got civ3 was to spread my cities too far like I did in civ2. Civ3 corruption idea was to discourage "the civ with the most cities wins" but in the end it didn't work out that way.
***********
ONTOPIC
Hey lets keep it simple you have no 'facts' you have jaded opinon. I had to discredit on hypocitical Naysay which has been refuted all the way. None of that matters here.
When you go OT to Call another posters intent into question the same will happen to you. . Before people consider your opinon based on the 'OT' defamation you supplied, they should be able to see proof of THe 'Smidden Agenda' before justifing this or any of your future cliams as "fact" ..OR..... your post in which I had to defended, should have been striken from accord. Are we cool?

ONTOPIC

SO whens the patch due?