Alarming silence of Firaxis

[Duuk]

Sorry, I'm getting off topic. Basically, I totally expect silence from Firaxis. They have learned what happens when they "feed us" information, so what reason do they have to do it again?

I'm going to both agree and disagree with you on this point. My future in politics is assured

Alexman released information, which was good. The abuse directed at Alexman was bad. Alexman reacted badly, which is also inexcusable but understandable since he's a programmer, not a public relations employee.

All in all, Alexman should be thanked for his personal efforts...

...but Firaxis should be lambasted for allowing that trainwreck to happen. Firaxis should have at least one full time employee handling customer relations, and I suspect they do but somehow don't feel that CFC and Poly deserve "full credit". 99% of the vitriol that was leveled on Alexman could have been avoided by a Firaxis employee saying "Whoops, our bad - give us some extra time". The other 1% of abuse was by people that just enjoy abusing other people on teh internets.

Firaxis' complete lack of interaction here is shameful and deserves all the scorn and mockery that humanity can bring to bear. It's tragic that a guy trying to be helpful (like Alexman) had to get flamed to the point of doing something "high school" in response. I'm sure that Alexman knows (now that it's several days later) that his response was wrong and childish, but I'm also sure that he will never, ever try to be helpful again. That's a loss to the community, but Firaxis caused that disaster, not CFC.

 

[Wodan]

But wouldn't that overwrite the vanilla DLL?

No... it would put the dll into the BtS directory, if that's where it was supposed to go. If it was a patch for vanilla, then yes, it would go into the vanilla directory. This is all easily do-able when you create a .zip.

How about making an installation program that re-names the vanilla DLL to CvGameCoreDLL.bak, and when it's uninstalled, reverts to it?

Sure, but that's more trouble. You need to be a programmer and have the appropriate utilities. The .zip trick, OTOH, anybody can do.

You are contradicting yourself. First, you tell us that the "hand that was feeding us" belonged to "the individual who was being nice enough to pass information to us", not to Firaxis. Then you declare that you "expect total silence from Firaxis" because "they have learned what happens when they 'feed us' information." You can't have it both ways.

Aren't you nitpicking his wording? You're right that he contradicted himself. But, replace the 2nd "they" with "someone". The intent of his statement is accurate.

Considering how buggy the recent patch is, it is quite reasonable to expect a new patch from Firaxis fairly soon

We have a patch, an unoffical one. It seems more reasonable to me for Firaxis to wait a while to see if the community discovers any more issues.

Wodan

 

[onedreamer]

is there any chance people will stop whining on these board ?

 

[warpstorm]

On the other side, I think we have a lot of reasons to remember everyone and at every possible opportunity about the way FIRAXIS left Civ 3 Conquest without fixing and adjusting the things they should do.

Conquests was a totally different beast than BTS. Conquests was primarily contracted out to BreakAway to build, but we weren't on contract to support it after it shipped (and Firaxis didn't have the staff to - why would they have contracted it out if they did?).

 

[Duuk]

is there any chance people will stop whining on these board ?

Yes. As soon as Firaxis patches all their mistakes.

So probably not.

 

[onedreamer]

why don't they whine with Firaxis then ? These boards are not run by Firaxis or Take2, they aren't official boards.

 

[Duuk]

why don't they whine with Firaxis then ? These boards are not run by Firaxis or Take2, they aren't official boards.

Find me a link to Firaxis official forum, and I'll post there hourly. I promise.

 

[Öjevind Lång]

We have a patch, an unoffical one. It seems more reasonable to me for Firaxis to wait a while to see if the community discovers any more issues.

Wodan

I'm not prepared to thank Firaxis for Bhruic's patch. Also, as I have stated before, I simply am no good at editing dlls and the like, so I'll wait for an official patch. Correction: I'll go do something else, until the day. If it comes.

Alll kudos to Bhruic (and to Solver before him), all the same.

 

[onedreamer]

Find me a link to Firaxis official forum, and I'll post there hourly. I promise.

the fact that they don't have one should suggest you that they don't care of people whining on forums and that you should use other means.

 

[Duuk]

the fact that they don't have one should suggest you that they don't care of people whining on forums and that you should use other means.

Or that I shouldn't pay for their products anymore, since they don't solicit the opinions of their customers.

 

[Methos]

You are contradicting yourself.

Yes and no. Alex isn't allowed to post the changelog without Firaxis's permission (if he wants to keep his job). So in a way Firaxis was "feeding" us since they allowed it. Though, I should have worded it better and used something other than "they". My mistake.

 

[BSmith1068]

I guess it's plain frustration at their lack of responsiveness. Look at Bhruic, he seems to have fixed a lot of the stuff in a fraction of the time it took them. Makes you wonder what they're doing there.

Double Standard. If Bhruic introduces a new bug, or some other quirkyness, he will be forgived because it is not an official patch and he is just trying to help out. On the other hand, if Firaxis introduces a new bug they get lambasted and accused of conspiricy.

I am not getting into the arguement on how Firaxis is handling the current situation (because I think it is useless). My point is that as soon as something is "official" it takes a lot more time to release (extensive QA, multiple level of reviews, internal beaurocracy, decision to see if they can identify and fix more bugs/issues than the ones currently obvious, the list goes on).

Bhuric (or anyone for that matter) can just go do it. If it is not perfect, no one cares, because the expectation that it is perfect is not there.

 

[vilemerchant]

Double Standard. If Bhruic introduces a new bug, or some other quirkyness, he will be forgived because it is not an official patch and he is just trying to help out. On the other hand, if Firaxis introduces a new bug they get lambasted and accused of conspiricy.

LOL! Bhruic took days. Firaxis took months. Firaxis CAUSED bugs. Bhruic FIXED their bugs and didn't cause any.

 

[Wodan]

I'm not prepared to thank Firaxis for Bhruic's patch.

Uhh... irrelevant? Nobody asked you to.

Also, as I have stated before, I simply am no good at editing dlls and the like, so I'll wait for an official patch. Correction: I'll go do something else, until the day. If it comes.

You have a solution, and you choose not to use it. There's no lack of assistance from people here at CFC, to overcome your dll handicaps. All you have to do is ask for help, instead of stating your unwillingness to even try.

I'm at the point of "Aw, come on."

they don't solicit the opinions of their customers.

Seems to me all you know is that they don't solicit opinions publicly on CFC. They may solicit any number of people via PM, who they locate here. Or, they may do in-person focus groups from people they find at EBgames stores. Or of people they find at conventions. Or all of these, or others.

A quick perusal of the manual did show me that there is a phone number and web site for Take2 feedback and support. Why don't you try using that? I'm sure on their web site you could also find an address and phone number, if you prefer to give them your feedback in written form.

Here's the US address:
Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc. 622 Broadway
New York, NY 10012 (646) 536-2842

There's an address in Europe, too. They also have a nice on-line submission form on their web page, specifically asking for feedback.

Aside: I did also note that they specifically directed people to CFC. So, they officially acknowledge and direct people to the community here, for support and assistance, in addition to their offical phone number and web site (and address / phone). IMO that is de-facto encouragement of the so-called unofficial patch.

You know, I think the word "interim" might be better than "unofficial". It's really a patch to tide us over until Firaxis is able to do one. Isn't that another way to look at it?

Wodan

 

[CivAgamemnon]

I'm sorry, but I honestly don't care anymore. I think, for now, I'm getting off this board and just go back to playing Warlords until things are resolved. It's just getting too stressful. I'd rather not say something I'll wind up regretting. Ciao.

 

[BSmith1068]

LOL! Bhruic took days. Firaxis took months. Firaxis CAUSED bugs. Bhruic FIXED their bugs and didn't cause any.

I think you misread my post. I am not debating what Bhruic did or how long it took him. I am explaining why it is possible for someone like Bhruic to do what he did (with little to no "downside" if there is a problem), and why it takes much longer for Firaxis to release something (if at all).

 

[jray]

Originally Posted by jray
But wouldn't that overwrite the vanilla DLL?

No... it would put the dll into the BtS directory, if that's where it was supposed to go. If it was a patch for vanilla, then yes, it would go into the vanilla directory. This is all easily do-able when you create a .zip.

Oops, poor use of the word "vanilla" on my part. I meant the Firaxis-provided BtS DLL. To be more specific, why is it any different for multiplayer folks to suffer from out-of-synch DLL's at My Games\... than out-of-synch DLL's at Program Files\...? It just seems silly to me to gimp the ability to use the DLL in CustomAssets without a mod, unless I'm not understanding the real benefit for multiplayer.

 

[Wodan]

Oops, poor use of the word "vanilla" on my part. I meant the Firaxis-provided BtS DLL. To be more specific, why is it any different for multiplayer folks to suffer from out-of-synch DLL's at My Games\... than out-of-synch DLL's at Program Files\...? It just seems silly to me to gimp the ability to use the DLL in CustomAssets without a mod, unless I'm not understanding the real benefit for multiplayer.

I think we're talking about 2 different things. One is putting the patch in the correct location. Two is the OOS issues. I could be wrong, but it's my understanding that the causes of the latter aren't related to the former.

Wodan

 

[jray]

I think we're talking about 2 different things. One is putting the patch in the correct location. Two is the OOS issues. I could be wrong, but it's my understanding that the causes of the latter aren't related to the former.

Ah, it looks like I was accidentally continuing a thread of discussion over in the Unofficial Patch thread. There, Jaybe said this:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaybe
DLLs are disallowed from CustomAssets because of multi-player games. The game would (or might) not detect that the DLLs were different, leading to sync (and not to mention cheating) problems.

And I responded by asking why the placement of DLL's in CustomAssets is such a big deal, because people could just as easily have out-of-synch or cheat DLL's at Program Files instead.

So I'm still curious as to the reason that DLL's were booted from CustomAssets.

 

[ripple01]

Double Standard. If Bhruic introduces a new bug, or some other quirkyness, he will be forgived because it is not an official patch and he is just trying to help out. On the other hand, if Firaxis introduces a new bug they get lambasted and accused of conspiricy.

Um, because we're not paying Bhruic for his work and we did pay Firaxis for theirs?

Cheers,
ripple01