If what happens? CIv Rev is happening eventully.
What's with all the hate?
- Thread starter XxtraLarGe
- Start date
If what happens? CIv Rev is happening eventully.
SO you think this holds up?
books were made to be fun just some people got smart while reading them lol.........you jerk
Swein Forkbeard
Nintendo Fan
No, I meant that if this huge "fight" over whether Civ3 is better than Civ4 or not and why CivRev is the subject of lots of hate continues, then I'd rather be out playing Metroid Prime or something.
Wrong thread dude but Does that still go on? I hope my name still comes up from time to time
Im mearly stating it was a waste of resources. ANd Instead of playin Prime meteor You should be out priming for a job
Sullla
Patrician Roman Dictator
T.A. Jones has spent the last two and a half years bashing Civ4 at every turn, endlessly proclaiming the superiority of Civ3. If you look at his posting history, you'll see that nearly all of those 3000+ posts have come in the Civ4 forums, constantly harping on one minor issue or another. He's an outright troll of the worst sort, and I would never use that term lightly.
So why am I not surprised that T.A. is back again, ripping yet another Civ game without ever having played it... You'll notice that his points don't make any sense whatsoever (Firaxis should remake Civ3 as an educational game?!?), but instead are simply thrown out to troll this topic and stir up controversy. As usual, this has worked: a dead thread has been revived, and the last two pages are full of replies to T.A.'s posts.
Since we don't have an "ignore user" feature at CivFanatics, my advice to everyone here would be to scroll past any and all of his posts. They all say the same thing: Civ3 is awesome, every other Civ game sucks - and so do you for liking them. It's pointless trying to debate with a closed mind, so don't bother.
So why am I not surprised that T.A. is back again, ripping yet another Civ game without ever having played it... You'll notice that his points don't make any sense whatsoever (Firaxis should remake Civ3 as an educational game?!?), but instead are simply thrown out to troll this topic and stir up controversy. As usual, this has worked: a dead thread has been revived, and the last two pages are full of replies to T.A.'s posts.
Since we don't have an "ignore user" feature at CivFanatics, my advice to everyone here would be to scroll past any and all of his posts. They all say the same thing: Civ3 is awesome, every other Civ game sucks - and so do you for liking them. It's pointless trying to debate with a closed mind, so don't bother.
THe worst sort? I though those were paid/sponsered posters?
Are you still sore from us( many others besides me) bashin the snore story proganda peice you did on civ4 and how it was the saviour/masterpeice you had the honour to work on, as you clamoured on you ripped civ3 from a to z.
Well sorry a few of us(few thousand) burst that bubble. I agree though, The one who hits with reality the most is often the enemy of the targets host. (promoters/tester turned public relation poster) So I touched on all the topics you were saying were so well done in your 'why civ4 rules and civ3 sucks' summery. THis makes me ignorable only to those who cant stand seeing thier ideas being recongnized for what they are, deplorable...as compared to what was scraped
On the topic of history why not give the link to are colourful conversation in the 'CIv3 sucks thread'
It can tell it certainly left you in great spirits.
WAit. I came here to bring my idea discussion near the forfront in which it revolved .Sadly a few civ4 branded followers brought up things that had nothing to do with my topic.
CIv3's engine works on most computers and civ4's dosn't. Thats where the comparison ties in and thats where it ends.
ONly a few posters from past debates who mybe had things they hadn't forgot returned with sour grapes to try n scour my point. IT still got through
The focus point invloved a proven approach and exciting direction in which the company could have chosen.
IT was simple "what if they chose the other road less traveled" topic.
It was supported and not contested so another tactic was tried..
Me admittidly, I quite enjoyed this myself, but fun had I guess, begin when the site's number one 'ream and repeat, anything to "legally cheat', civ3 Hall of fame champ came in.
This guy who helped tear apart the civ3 game to keep sane when going for more shame/fame HOF Leaderboard, (.1% of buyer play HOF) .. has the nerve to say IM to negative towards a civ project .
Lets see he made it his mission to post anti civ3 setiments all over the internet. INfact his proganda is used as main focal refrence for an entire thread " why do you still play civ3" posted in the civ3 forum!! by none other then admiring sulla fan Swein Forkbeard
Ya I guess Sulla knew he had a good audience when he unleashed his lil go ahead n hate T.A speech
Allyou guys tried to do was tarnish the messenger for his past mention of obvious flaws with a game that had no busniess even being brought up in discussion
You don't agree with my idea to bad, you can take off
FOr one Its a better plan then trying to denounce it weakly as he has then after a sulla sub in, switch to hate mongering me over unrelation in game prefrence.Hate mongering? People are being discriminated against now because they like certain games? Are there Halo fans curb stomping people for liking Civ3? Did someone burn a giant wooden four on your lawn because you like Civ3?
How come it's not hate mongering when you say only pre schoolers would like CivRev? That's like saying only greasy basement dwellers with ten year old computers like Civ3.
How come it's not hate mongering when you say only pre schoolers would like CivRev? That's like saying only greasy basement dwellers with ten year old computers like Civ3.
WAit. I came here to bring my idea n' discussion near the forfront in which it revolved .Sadly a few civ4 branded followers brought up things that had nothing to do with my topic.
ONly a few posters from past debates who mybe had things they hadn't forgot returned with sour grapes. Civ3 runs on most computers and civ4 dosn't. Thats where the comparison ties in and thats where it ends.
The focus point invloved a proven approach and exciting direction in which the company could have chosen.
IT was simple "what if they chose the other road less traveled" topic.
It was supported and not contested so another tactic was tried..
Me admittidly, I quite enjoyed this myself, but the fun begin I guess, when the site's number one 'ream and repeat, anything to "legally cheat', civ3 Hall of fame champ came in.
This guy who helped tear apart the civ3 game, who was used to saying the word "editer" with shame( reason you ain't got one )ripped up the freedom from the masses who enjoyed it to keep his HOF posse sane without more cheap repeat feats for the creds on the Civ street.
Now they and multi play enjoy their chained down game with red everwhere on the way up the new civ4 HOF Leaderboard (.1% of buyer play HOF) ..n' he has the nerve to say IM to negative towards a civ project .He demolished a legacy for a vocal few.
Lets see he made it his mission to post anti civ3 setiments all over the internet. INfact his proganda is used as main focal refrence for an entire thread " why do you still play civ3" posted in the civ3 forum!! by none other then admiring sulla fan Swein Forkbeard
Ya I guess Sulla knew he had a good audience when he unleashed his lil go ahead n hate T.A speech
ITs all silent on the civ4 supporter front on the Civ comparison I made dealing with performance needed to run the program on a school budget eqpt. SO because I focused on civ3 engine for solution, you dismiss and ignore my entire theme and point of veiw as now IM mearly obsessed with civ3 and going off on how great that game, not how great the harder road taken could have lead to more rewards
IS that how you expect this to end, with me looking silly? lol
Oh brother Comon kiddies lets do better then that
Allyou guys tried to do was tarnish the messenger for his past mention of obvious flaws with a game that had no busniess even being brought up in discussion
You don't agree with my idea to bad, you can take off
FOr one Its a better plan then trying to denounce it weakly as one here has or then, after a sulla sub in, switched to OT trolling over unrelated point of game prefrence.You sound like one of those guys who refuses to accept that people can like things that you don't like without being paid off or being PR guys.
You're doing a pretty good job of looking silly BTW.
The reason it's so quiet on the "Civ4 front" is because noone honestly gives a **** besides you, you need to quit taking video game's so seriously, they're just games, not ideals worth fighting over.
You don't listen when people are talking to you, and when someone makes a point you can't counter you either ignore them or only quote and argue against the ones you can. You are the Bill O'Reilly of Civilization games.
You're doing a pretty good job of looking silly BTW.
The reason it's so quiet on the "Civ4 front" is because noone honestly gives a **** besides you, you need to quit taking video game's so seriously, they're just games, not ideals worth fighting over.
You don't listen when people are talking to you, and when someone makes a point you can't counter you either ignore them or only quote and argue against the ones you can. You are the Bill O'Reilly of Civilization games.
Swein Forkbeard
Nintendo Fan
What's the deal with Civ3? Back in 2001, you should have buzzed off and played Metal Gear Solid 2 or Final Fantasy X or Smash Bros. Melee or ICO or Rogue Squadron II or Advance Wars or Mario Kart or Halo or Conker or Grand Theft Auto III or Gran Turismo 3 or something. Now you should just go play Halo, Metroid, Zelda, Mario, Final Fantasy, Castlevania, Resident Evil, etc. instead of all this Civilization business.
And what's the deal with Civ being so highly ranked anyway? I can't get into Civ4 without forcing myself, and judging from reviews it's actually the least time consuming game in the series!
And what's the deal with Civ being so highly ranked anyway? I can't get into Civ4 without forcing myself, and judging from reviews it's actually the least time consuming game in the series!
warpstorm
Yumbo? Yumbo!
Swein Forkbeard
Nintendo Fan
I was thinking about a bunch of spin-offs for Civ instead of a new game altogether.
And it appears we may have a heretic, I might add.
Moderator Action: Okay, everyone calm down, or I will close this.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
I don't have any grudge against anyone playing anything they enjoy.
I do worry, that given the expressed aims of Civ Revolutions being a simpler quicker game with shiny graphics that is intended to be playable quickly in an evening, and given no plans to port it to the PC in the foreseeable future, that Civ 5 will go in that direction.
In an ideal world, I would like to see Civ Rev on PC for people who like simpler quicker games with shiny graphics, and Civ 5 to have depth and detail and complexity and not to mess around with the shiny.
Actually, no. Not at all. Not even slightly. Time spent developing multiplayer is time spent on a feature I am never going to use, so from my perspective it's time wasted.
- Joined
- May 5, 2005
- Messages
- 8,875
Before this thread is closed, I want to come back to the theme of this thread:
Post 1: Why are so many people down on Civ Revolutions? It's a different game meant to expand the appeal of Civ to a different crowd.I've played Civ since the original, and personally, I'm excited by this game. I realize it's not going to be the same depth as Civ IV. That's alright. Bejeweled isn't the same depth either, and I can still enjoy that on occasion as well...
If you don't like it, just ignore it and vote with your dollars, no need to spout hate. You add no value to the conversation by doing so.
Additionally to the reasons I gave in post 25 of this thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5974324&postcount=25) there is one big "burning" fact for a lot of posters who criticize Civ 4 and now Civ Rev:
With the last final semi-patch, that was done for Civ 3, Firaxis frankly posted, that this is a semi-patch that must be uncompleted as they now are doing something better, that will satisfy all civers - Civ 4. Civ 4 didn´t satisfy all civers. The moralic duty by Firaxis and Take 2 to fix the bugs of Civ 3 and to make the game working as it was advertized and where they got our money for, was and is still open -especially as this firm additionally advertises with the good support for their customers (even with Civ Rev), what is not true in my eyes. Of course even in the Civ 4 forums at CFC there was pointed on the facts what civers don´t like about Civ 4 (and why Civ 4 was and is no reason to give only an uncompleted semi-patch for the customers of Civ 3).
Instead of solving their old moralic debts about Civ 3 and completing that unfinished last semi-patch for Civ 3 after Firaxis and Take 2 have finished Civ 4 and their expansions, they are now doing Civ Rev. Of course even with Civ Rev they get shown the known unsatisfying parts of that product and that this product is no substitute for not finishing their last official semi-patch for Civ 3.
So just to "ignore Civ Rev and vote with your dollars" in my eyes is not enough. The firms like Firaxis and Take 2 spend big sums in copy protection, but who helps all the small customers, who spend their 35 or more dollars and received a bugged product that even after lot of years is not getting fixed?
Post 1: Why are so many people down on Civ Revolutions? It's a different game meant to expand the appeal of Civ to a different crowd.I've played Civ since the original, and personally, I'm excited by this game. I realize it's not going to be the same depth as Civ IV. That's alright. Bejeweled isn't the same depth either, and I can still enjoy that on occasion as well...
If you don't like it, just ignore it and vote with your dollars, no need to spout hate. You add no value to the conversation by doing so.
Additionally to the reasons I gave in post 25 of this thread (http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=5974324&postcount=25) there is one big "burning" fact for a lot of posters who criticize Civ 4 and now Civ Rev:
With the last final semi-patch, that was done for Civ 3, Firaxis frankly posted, that this is a semi-patch that must be uncompleted as they now are doing something better, that will satisfy all civers - Civ 4. Civ 4 didn´t satisfy all civers. The moralic duty by Firaxis and Take 2 to fix the bugs of Civ 3 and to make the game working as it was advertized and where they got our money for, was and is still open -especially as this firm additionally advertises with the good support for their customers (even with Civ Rev), what is not true in my eyes. Of course even in the Civ 4 forums at CFC there was pointed on the facts what civers don´t like about Civ 4 (and why Civ 4 was and is no reason to give only an uncompleted semi-patch for the customers of Civ 3).
Instead of solving their old moralic debts about Civ 3 and completing that unfinished last semi-patch for Civ 3 after Firaxis and Take 2 have finished Civ 4 and their expansions, they are now doing Civ Rev. Of course even with Civ Rev they get shown the known unsatisfying parts of that product and that this product is no substitute for not finishing their last official semi-patch for Civ 3.
So just to "ignore Civ Rev and vote with your dollars" in my eyes is not enough. The firms like Firaxis and Take 2 spend big sums in copy protection, but who helps all the small customers, who spend their 35 or more dollars and received a bugged product that even after lot of years is not getting fixed?
Swein Forkbeard
Nintendo Fan
Civilization < Resident Evil, Warcraft, Zelda, Metroid, Final Fantasy, Castlevania, Mario, Metal Gear, Half-Life, Deus Ex, Pokemon, Elder Scrolls, StarCraft, WarCraft, Grand Theft Auto, Sim, Virtua Fighter, Tekken, Soulcalibur, etc.
Aramazd
Deity
You should not be allowed on the internet. Just because IGN doesn't like 4x games doesn't mean they aren't good. Also, don't tell me what to play.
