C3C Patch or Civ4 earlier?

[Arathorn]

Let's pretend for a moment that the only three choices are Civ4 in November of 2005 and no C3C patch, Civ4 in January of 2006 and a minimal patch (sub bug, AI armies, barbs), or Civ4 in March of 2006 with a solid patch (minimal plus war weariness, RR movement exposed to editor, and a couple other small features like arrowing through diplomacy windows).

Let's also pretend that money doesn't matter, so Firaxis can ship Civ4 whenever and still be fine, financially. Yes, this is a false assumption, but we can pretend. We're pretending we have the power to guide things....

Also please realize that this is FAR from a representative sample of potential Civ4 buyers and will probably have no effect on Firaxis decisions, let alone be a guiding influence, so you might as well be completely honest.

Arathorn

 

[Kemal]

Minimum patch, civ4 in Januari.

As long as the (as indicated by many forum members) most obvious and irritating bugs and errors get fixed, civ4 should get priority at this point in time.

 

[kokoras]

It depends from what ATARI-FIRAXIS thinks.I voted for a solid patch and Civ4 in March not because i don't care about the Civ4 release but because i think that if they dedicate more time the result will be what it sould be.But i am not a programmer,if they know that they can do it in a shorter period of time,better for us all,but i realy don't want to see or even immagine that CIV4 will be an improvised game.
C3C final patch thow sould be something that they sould do whatever they decided with CIV4.

 

[Pfeffersack]

Solid Patch/March 2006

Reason: I don't mind getting Civ4 a bit later.Fixing Civ3 Conquests is more important...some major concepts are still broken and prevent ´playing the game to full extend.Also, I don't think Civ4 will be any better, if they don't fix Conquests (reason: Civ5)

 

[dunk]

PATCH! PATCH! PATCH!

It's much more important to repair the broken things in an existing game than make a new one so people will forget about it and flock to buy a new game.

 

[Vizurok]

I would like to see Civ4 as soon as possible! There are bugs in c3c v22 (numerous ), but Firaxis should focuss on the players who wnt to play with the new and good game!

 

[Gen]

Minimal patch now, Civ 4 in January (but I wouldn't mind Civ 4 released even later). Minimal patch is really all I want to fully enjoy the game, especially my favourite conquests (Middle Ages and Sengoku) as they include invisible units and are full of warfare (no AI armies ).

 

[TomOC]

Solid patch. I'm not ready to buy, and learn a new Civ game! I'm still trying to master this one (and it will probably take me until 2006 to do it ).

 

[warpstorm]

Double post (but not double vote)

 

[warpstorm]

Civ4, all the way. The sooner the better. With any luck it'll be higher quality from day one. After playing this game for nearly 3 years, I'm wanting a new one. Heck, I've been playing C3C for over a year as it is.

 

[Yaype]

Civ 3 (and expansions) is a highly entertaining game that could keep me going for much, much longer than it already has. For that reason, I would like them to get out a major patch to fix the problems currently in the game rather than pushing an earlier release of Civ4.

 

[Arizona_Steve]

...or option (4) - Send me the C3C source code and I'll fix it!

 

[Turner]

I should have read the poll before voting. I voted for 'Solid Patch' when really the minimal patch is good enough for me.

I'm not too concerned about when Civ4 comes out. I'd rather see it stable than out the door with bugs. To me, the last patch for C3C and Civ4 are two different things. Yes, I know they're not...

 

[Commander Bello]

Civ4 in 2007 and a stable, solid patch for C3C.

Reason:
Civ4 will be very buggy (if there will be a Civ4). Most people expect it to be better than Civ3/PTW/C3C because of the new coding.
I expect it to be (at least) as buggy as the mentioned ones because of the new coding.

I want to be able to play a good C3C, and then I will take my time and decide if I'm going to spend some additional money for Civ4.

 

[LordKestrel]

If we're going to be adding a lot of stuff to a nice solid patch, how about being able to customize the bonuses (boni?) that each trait gives. Perhaps I'd like to make Commercial double the OCN, and add +15 gold to the center square. Or maybe Industrious should work three times as fast, but have to pay double for improvements. It'd be really nice to be able to play with the various traits.

 

[microbe]

Minimal patch, strictly bug fixes. No more features.

See my sig for the 3 must-fixes that I know of.

 

[Doc Tsiolkovski]

Minimal patch; I'm afraid adding new features could just cause even more bugs

Don't really car about some month more to wait, btw.

 

[zorven]

I would rather have a patched C3C for 21 months than a broken C3C for 17 months.

 

[HellboundHeathcliff]

Civ4 in 2007 and a stable, solid patch for C3C.

I'm with CB

 

[kring]

C3C with minimal patch. I find C3C no fun as it is currently patched. Where I was still heavily playing Civ3 after its last patch, I don't find myself playing C3C at all. The potential for fun is there if it was patched with the major bugs fixed.