Civ 4, a failure made successful by money and absence of community

[Sorceresss]

ever think take2 doesnt care what yall think?

I am shocked : Take 2 does not care about what we all think ?! Shocked : totallllllly shocked.

 

[Frewfrux]

On a slightly different note (I'm pretty sure it's a different note) I would like to go on record as having said that I am not a jealous rival, I think.

Seeing as it was this thread that I was posting to, can anyone here tell me if I am a jealous rival or not? Does anyone even know what I'm talking about? Does anyone know the meaning of "dish the threads"? I'm very confused.

 

[kipperthedog]

We need the input of more game developers on this forum. They only have to wade in under the protection of a pseudonym. Firaxis employees : feel free to jump into the fire !

I've been a game developer (not for Firaxis!) for 11 years and although I agree with a lot of what PennHead says I think it's worth pointing out that 2K and some elements of the community have have been the source of some ill feeling.

Every PC game I have worked on has had at least three levels of testing outside of the programming department.

QA : testing elements of the game for function, does it crash, are all of the graphics there, does the pathfinding work, are the savegames valid - feedback is sent to programmers or artists, usually entered as bugs. May be done by devloper, publisher or externally - usually by 2 of these. QA will typically go for months and months.

Gameplay testing (sometimes called beta testing) : testing gameplay ideas for tuning, fun, to check for inconsistencies etc. - Feedback is usually sent to designers often via reports, game replays and so on. Usually done by the devloper as it tends to be part of an iterative design process. Publishers often use community members, or may even have an open beta. Game playtesting duration depends a lot on the product - a game like Civ would have years probably.

Compatibility Testing : A testing pass done to check whether the game runs with common hardware combinations. This test will give you the minmum and reccomended hardware. Compatability testing would typically be done by the publisher, either in their own labs or by an external compatibility tester. In either case compatibility testing is done in large facilities, with lots of PC's under lot's of different configurations. A report is generated and thats that. This might be done once or twice for a game and each test might take a few days.

Now obviously I'm generalising a lot here - there is a lot of crossover between QA and gameplay testing, different types of products emphasise different types of testing and so on.

We don't know what sort of testing plan Firaxis had for CivIV, we don't know how closely they stuck to their plan and we don't know what expediencies they had to accomodate nor are they likeley to divulge such information. It may be that their contract with 2K said they will deliver the game fully tested - it's impossible for us to say and I'd bet anything that they aren't talking.

What we CAN say is that the compatibility testing phase of the testing plan had insufficient impact on the shipped product. Maybe they had no compatibility testing, or maybe they did and didn't have time to act on the report.

Either way the QA and gameplay problems are largely minor compared to the hardware compatibilitry problems - and this I am guessing is a 2K Games issue - probably from rushing the release date.

I also think that the attitude of some in the forums has been less than constructive, and I think that people would do well to remember that the "whiners" are just sad 'cos they can't play civ. Be a little understanding and tolerant. But this is the internet I suppose.

My experience with the game has been mixed - it runs great on my uber PC at work - at home I use my IBM laptop (which i love to bits) but it has a Radeon 7500 so I have bright yellow terrain everywhere and looking at the game makes baby Jesus cry.

_______________________________________
Kipper

 

[screwtype]

I think people would appriciate a level of support from their fellow gamers, rather then the response most of us have gotten which is for the most part "Shut the F up, no one gives a crap about your problems, oh and by the way ... hahahah ... My game works "perfect".

I agree with that. It really irritates me when people come on this board and say "stop whining, the game works fine for me, so go away and quit bothering us". IMO they are selfish, self-centred idiots, the kind of people who no doubt would be the very FIRST to be all over these boards expressing their outrage if the game didn't work for them!

The game works fine for me, but I certainly sympathize with those who've paid their money and found themselves with an unusable product. And I can understand your concern at the lack of feedback from Firaxis so far.

My guess is that Firaxis will not admit to a problem so soon after the game's release, out of fear it might hurt sales. Probably they *are* working on a fix, they just don't want to admit right now that it *needs* one.

So hopefully there'll be a patch for you guys soon. If not, then I think you have every right to make a noise about it. It's not as though this is affecting just a few isolated gamers after all. One poll here showed that 25% of buyers can't play the game, and that is totally unacceptable.

 

[oldStatesman]

So hopefully there'll be a patch for you guys soon. If not, then I think you have every right to make a noise about it. It's not as though this is affecting just a few isolated gamers after all. One poll here showed that 25% of buyers can't play the game, and that is totally unacceptable.

Not just here...there is no official number, but if you do google searches, and read reviews on other boards, and games sites, it seems to be in the neighborhood of between 15% and 25%. I'm sure the developers are very upset about this...they strive for perfection, and anything over a few % would be upsetting.

On the other hand, T2 probably doesn't really care, to them it's simply a numbers game. Civ4 is simply one product to them; and they are only concerned about the bottom line for their shareholders. They would sell pig slop if they could show a profit. And to a company like that, long term means nothing, so threats not to buy the next version in a few years are empty...it's all about 'the now' baby.

 

[General_Chaos]

Narrator: "A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now: should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one."
Business woman: "Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?"
Narrator: "You wouldn't believe."
Business woman: "Which car company do you work for?"
Narrator: "A major one."

 

[Gray_Lensman]

Not just here...there is no official number, but if you do google searches, and read reviews on other boards, and games sites, it seems to be in the neighborhood of between 15% and 25%. I'm sure the developers are very upset about this...they strive for perfection, and anything over a few % would be upsetting.

On the other hand, T2 probably doesn't really care, to them it's simply a numbers game. Civ4 is simply one product to them; and they are only concerned about the bottom line for their shareholders. They would sell pig slop if they could show a profit. And to a company like that, long term means nothing, so threats not to buy the next version in a few years are empty...it's all about 'the now' baby.

A few years back, most businesses would accept returned software, now-days, you are almost universally stuck with it, whether you like it or not. This fact alone has led to the arrogance of the major software publisher/retailers, and it is this fact that has slowed my overall purchase of games. I now read the unofficial forums (sometimes even the unofficial forums are too biased) to gather information prior to even considering making a purchase. In my case alone, it has resulted in a drastic reduction of actual games purchased.

Case-in-point: I used to buy at least one or more new games per month. Now, I might buy 3 games a year. Overall, software sales have slumped over the last few years and I can't help but think that this has a lot to do with it.

So when someone slaps down some money on what they believe it going to be a first rate game from a super reputable designer like Firaxis, is it any wonder that they come into the forums to complain when their product is buggy and doesn't work? They have no other recourse, except to remember not to let themselves be burned again.

 

[oldStatesman]

A few years back, most businesses would accept returned software, now-days, you are almost universally stuck with it, whether you like it or not. This fact alone has led to the arrogance of the major software publisher/retailers, and it is this fact that has slowed my overall purchase of games.

Yeah...funny, the Big Corps 'justify' it, saying (with a wink and a nod) it prevents loss of $$ from pirates...and the sheeple buy the arguement and keep on grazing on that same old brown grass.

In reality, they have found these no return policies to be a huge pork barrel windfall for them. We are back to the good old days of the 19th Century, 'buyer beware' rather than 'consumer rights'...the Robber Barons rule the nest.

Ain't Globalization wunnerful???

 

[Sorceresss]

This thread sure has made some mileage since it was launched at 12:40 pm today ! (And that's without counting the deleted abusive posts.)

 

[bobalot]

Im a long time visitor to this site(mainly to get neat scenarios) and heres my 2 cents as a average gamer.

I don't know how to put in new ram, or put in a new graphics card of any hardware stuff like that, and on top of that its damn expensive for me. I share the computer with the rest of my family, so I can't just simply reformat,install new drivers and bascially "clean" out the system, as other people have alot of stuff stored on the computer.

You people may look down on me, but you lot forget one thing, most of you people here are the minority, you are the "elite". Most gamers don't bother post in these types of forums, most don't know how to properly reformat their system(or like me simply can't) and install new drivers or put in new hardware and alot of this other stuff.

It is a real pain in the arse to do all this stuff. I shouldn't have to do any of this stuff if :
a) My system is not in "bad" shape. (If your system is continually crashing, then its probably your system. However if it runs all your other games and programs fine, I shouldn't have to do radical changes to make one game work)
b) I meet the recomended requirements.

Many people are saying "wait for the patches", and I think thats fair enough. For those who say you should update your entire system or reformat etc even though you meet the requirements, I think you are talking rubbish.

I wish the reviews I read would have at least mentioned these propblems, they all have been uniformly good.Im sure at least one of them would have picked up on these bugs. It seems they just didn't want to let anybody know.

 

[Sorceresss]

I wish the reviews I read would have at least mentioned these prolems, they all have been uniformly good. Im sure at least one of them would have picked up on these bugs. It seems they just didn't want to let anybody know.

Most reviewers are member of a "cult" of PC Games insiders. They get invited to parties, amongst other fringe benefits (even if the pay is low).
One of the sacred principles of this "cult" is that anything associated with Sid Meier is god-like. To confer less than a score of 90% to a Sid Meier product is heresy : you don't get invited to parties anymore if you do.

 

[oldStatesman]

Most reviewers are member of a "cult" of PC Games insiders. They get invited to parties, amongst other fringe benefits (even if the pay is low).
One of the sacred principles of this "cult" is that anything associated with Sid Meier is god-like. To confer less than a score of 90% to a Sid Meier product is heresy : you don't get invited to parties anymore if you do.

I have a friend who is a reporter...and I asked him once did he get pressure to write 'acceptable' stories. He told me that there was no 'spoken' or written pressure, no outright censorship; but all reporters knew that the paper's survival depended on the advertisers, and that they should not write stuff that would be against the best interests of the advertisers, if they did they would find that they got less and less bylines, not get choice assignments, and lose out on promotions...

...On the other hand, if they did (or did not) write a controversial peice, and they got enough favorable response about the peice (or about them not covering the story) on the editorial letters to the Editor and circulation was affected adversely by subscription cancellations then the advertiser pressure could be alleviated...but only if the readers spoke out.

 

[bobalot]

Another example I can think of is Knights of the Old republic 2. A horribly buggy game that got rave reviews and alot of sales.

That game blew. The whole second half of the game was butchered. Lots of bad bugs and a badly cut up storyline towards the end. There were whole cutscences without any purpose.

A bad game that did well due to good reviews,hype and fanboys. Goddamn what a waste of cash.

 

[Baltimore Dank]

Another example I can think of is Knights of the Old republic 2. A horribly buggy game that got rave reviews and alot of sales.

That game blew. The whole second half of the game was butchered. Lots of bad bugs and a badly cut up storyline towards the end. There were whole cutscences without any purpose.

A bad game that did well due to good reviews,hype and fanboys. Goddamn what a waste of cash.

....

everyone knows that kotor2 got **** reviews and was basically an upgrade of the first(bad upgrade graphically, story-wise, and new content), dont bring that here... this game is solid... just because people cant configure their computers or afford up-to-date rigs doesnt mean that the critics are corrupt...c'mon, gamespot is the best place for reviews and they knew what they saw; civ4 being an awesome game and in the next couple years doing double what civ3 did.... play some other games and take civ4 in stride...

only real complaints i have is the internet lobby system, and i know understand what happened there....

welcome to the frontlines of gaming....war is hell....

 

[warpus]

I have a friend who is a reporter...and I asked him once did he get pressure to write 'acceptable' stories. He told me that there was no 'spoken' or written pressure, no outright censorship; but all reporters knew that the paper's survival depended on the advertisers, and that they should not write stuff that would be against the best interests of the advertisers, if they did they would find that they got less and less bylines, not get choice assignments, and lose out on promotions...

...On the other hand, if they did (or did not) write a controversial peice, and they got enough favorable response about the peice (or about them not covering the story) on the editorial letters to the Editor and circulation was affected adversely by subscription cancellations then the advertiser pressure could be alleviated...but only if the readers spoke out.

i quite frequently read PC Gamer magazine and their reviews of games.. and a lot of the reviews are NEGATIVE. in fact, even if a review is positive, they will list the cons, and more often than not, they are right on the money about what they say.

have you ever watched G4TechTV? They review a lot of video games and one of the things they do well is point out the NEGATIVE aspects of the games they review.. as well as the positive, of course.. but they do love to make fun of games

so to summarize.. perhaps this 'elitist' culture exists in some places, but the sources i stick to seem to be pretty good, as far fair reviews go.

 

[MeteorPunch]

i quite frequently read PC Gamer magazine and their reviews of games.. and a lot of the reviews are NEGATIVE. in fact, even if a review is positive, they will list the cons, and more often than not, they are right on the money about what they say.

PC Gamer didn't tell us about the rediculous loads 3-4 times per level in Half-Life 2. I didn't renew my subscription...

So anyway, never trust any reviewer except for yourself. Try to play demos or let a friend buy the game first to see if you like it.

 

[kulgan]

But there is patch!! Read the news.

I thank Firax for listening to the fan/players/forum and other stake holders.

 

[screwtype]

i quite frequently read PC Gamer magazine and their reviews of games.. and a lot of the reviews are NEGATIVE.

Yeah, but the other guy is right. They tend not to give bad reviews to games with big advertising budgets.

It's the smaller, independent gaming houses that mostly get the tough reviews.

 

[Aeson]

Another example I can think of is Knights of the Old republic 2. A horribly buggy game that got rave reviews and alot of sales.

That game blew. The whole second half of the game was butchered. Lots of bad bugs and a badly cut up storyline towards the end. There were whole cutscences without any purpose.

A bad game that did well due to good reviews,hype and fanboys. Goddamn what a waste of cash.

I quite liked KOTORII. So did my brother who played the same copy. About 100 hours of enjoyable playtime for me alone. Cost me $35. Quite a steal I'd say. Yah, the end wasn't that great, I still don't have any idea what one of the final movies had to do with how the game had ended, but that messed up maybe 2 minutes of the whole deal. (It was worth a good laugh afterwards anyways at least, joking with my brother about it.)

Never read a review for KOTORII, visited any related websites, or even posted about it until now. Guess that makes me a victim of hype and/or a fanboy, for having enjoyed a game.

 

[player1 fanatic]

Completly agree with you Aeson on KotORII.

Of course, after second and third playing I did see some not so big gameplay bugs, and after looking at web, that there is only one patch which does not fix any of those bugs, and that there are no more patches planned to be done.

And that's what I really dislike.
Low patch support.
Rush, take the cash, leave...


That's why I praise Firaxis.
It always had good patch support.
And that's why I'm defending it.