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

[Dairuka]

"The vocal minority will never control the outcome of a games success." - John Romero.

 

[Tremo]

My point isn't about about quality control so much as the expectations or standards that are applied. The person who bought the car is EXPECTED to be mad, whereas the person who buys software with defects apparently should EXPECT some initial defects (that may be fixed later with a patch). Also, a car that that shipped with 100 out of 100 faulty exhaust pipes would probably gain a bad reputation, whereas a program that ships with defects that affect 100% of users is the norm.

It's still comparing apples and oranges. A car is made out of physical parts and can be physically tested for any faults, whereas a piece of software cannot be tested as such.

Software creation is based on trial-and-error, physical products are often not. As such, expectations are bound to different because the very fundamentals of production differ from one another.

 

[Frewfrux]

Everything said so far lines up perfectly with exactly what I'm talking about and exactly why nothing in this industry will change, more importantly however will likely get worse.

There is a way of thinking in all industries (not just software) that goes something like this:

How much would perfection cost us? How much can we save by only achieving 'near-perfection'? How many faults in the final product will consumers allow before they stop buying?

Industry tries to figure out where this thin line is drawn and only produces products that near this line because to try to achieve perfection (what you are talking about) is not realistic.

At all!

The software industry is no exception. And what company is the one setting the standard for where this line should be drawn? Fraxis? I don't think so. (I think its Microsoft, of course).

I'm not saying that this is not a noble cause...I'm saying that your efforts are wasted here. This is not where you can ever expect to make change. You want to stand on a soapbox? Use Lynix and preach to the people who actually make the desissions.

 

[Tremo]

Civ4 runs perfectly on my machine [one CTD around the year 1960 so far], first time. I dont have updated drivers, and I don't have a 'clean' [as in reformatted] OS.

And yet you seem to agree with his statement of the game being a failure?

If I had to completely reformat my machine every time a new game came out, just to get it to work, i'd stick to console gaming.

Formatting and defragging is bull**** to fix issues like these. I agree. last time I defragged my HD was like 2 years ago At best they can increase the amount of memory available if you don't have enough.

I don't buy the hardware excuse. Hardware these days is equally complex as it used to be.

They are also different. many games have compatibility issues with certain hardware.

Also whats with the Microsoft bashing? In terms of games, they release excellent, stable, and relatively bug free games. I just bought Dungeon Siege 2, it ran fine on my PC, ran fine on my laptop which is about 3 years old now, and I havn't even considered looking for a patch for it.

Just because you bought one game doesn't mean you can say it's right or not. but i do agree with you that Microsoft bashing has become more of a fad then fact. I for one, am glad i have Windows XP to work with.

 

[DaveDash]

The software industry is no exception. And what company is the one setting the standard for where this line should be drawn? Fraxis? I don't think so. (I think its Microsoft, of course).

I find this comment hilarous, considering in terms of gaming development Microsoft release the most stable and bug free games out of any Publisher.

If anyone is setting the poor standard in the gaming industry, it is EA, not Microsoft.

 

[glothar]

How about a quick story: I bought Civ IV. When I got home, I installed it. I popped in the install disc, and started it up.

It crashed.

So I started it up again.

It crashed again.

I tried fiddling with the graphical settings and options, but no luck. Nothing I set would let me start up a game.

So I uninstalled it, updated my nVidia drivers, and re-installed it.

Bingo. Works on the first try.

Who's fault is that?

Mine.

Firaxis cannot and should not test the game on outdated drivers with known bugs in them. It was my fault for running a system with outdated divers. I refuse to feel sorry for all those people out there who couldn't run the game because their ATi drivers were several versions old. I can't even feel sorry for the people who had up to date drivers which didn't work correctly.

I know that you don't always have a choice, but I chose an nVidia card because ATi has had horribly buggy drivers for years. It's not Firaxis' fault if ATi's drivers don't work they way they claim they do. Sure, they can try to fix the problems when they show up, but to claim that they should fix all of ATi's bugs for them is just silly.

This is perhaps the problem with PC gaming. People don't want to think about their computers. They want everything to be perfect but they don't want to pay for it or wait for it. They want the newest stuff to work flawlessly with the oldest stuff even when the oldest stuff is old because it doesn't work. Whenever you buy a brand new game, you should always be updating whatever drivers you've got. If that is a hard, technical process, then perhaps you should complain to the hardware manufacturers, not the game developer who is just making a game based on what the manufacturers claim they will do.

 

[DaveDash]

And yet you seem to agree with his statement of the game being a failure?

Ok, perhaps not a failure. No. But unacceptable, yes?

Formatting and defragging is bull**** to fix issues like these. I agree. last time I defragged my HD was like 2 years ago At best they can increase the amount of memory available if you don't have enough.

I agree.

They are also different. many games have compatibility issues with certain hardware.

I editted that comment out

Just because you bought one game doesn't mean you can say it's right or not. but i do agree with you that Microsoft bashing has become more of a fad then fact. I for one, am glad i have Windows XP to work with.

I have bought almost every Microsoft game since, uhh, Age of Empires. I have in fact bought almost every game period since Lords of the Realm way back in 1991. I am an extremely avid gamer.

Microsoft is the publisher I have been the MOST happy with.

I agree on the XP issue, and for the record, I use linux and MacOS X every day in my job

 

[Dairuka]

Age of Empires III was anything but a stable and bug free game.

 

[Frewfrux]

I find this comment hilarous, considering in terms of gaming development Microsoft release the most stable and bug free games out of any Publisher.

If anyone is setting the poor standard in the gaming industry, it is EA, not Microsoft.

The only Microsoft game I bought never worked properly so I never bought another one. I am not talking about their games...I am talking about the standards they have set with Windows and Office products.

 

[steelviper]

It's still comparing apples and oranges. A car is made out of physical parts and can be physically tested for any faults, whereas a piece of software cannot be tested as such.

Software creation is based on trial-and-error, physical products are often not. As such, expectations are bound to different because the very fundamentals of production differ from one another.

EXACTLY! Great point.

Physical parts are tested thoroughly for faults. Complex software cannot be tested to the same extent in a timely/cost effective manner.

The end result is that untested code ships. (I know... I've done it.)

It is comical that some people try to call it "software engineering". "Software creation" seems much more accurate, as it is very much a trial-and-error process.

It's just kind of scary sometimes that this is considered ok.

 

[Bast]

The game works fine on my computer. So it's not a failure at all.

 

[DaveDash]

The only Microsoft game I bought never worked properly so I never bought another one. I am not talking about their games...I am talking about the standards they have set with Windows and Office products.

The only time my Windows XP system has crashed is when I put dodgy hardware in it.

The Macs here at work crash far more than Windows XP.

Linux, of course, never does.

Their office products are also top of the line. Lotus is useless [we use that here too].

Bugs? Yes. There are lots of them. An operating system however compared to a game is significantly more complex.
Go look at all the exploits out there. I think youll find there are far more for Linux than any Microsoft product.

Since an OS is far more complex than a game, apples to oranges really, shall we stick to the gaming industry?

 

[xguild]

Yes, a nice way to excuse yourself from backing up your claims by dancing around the center issue that you yourself brought up in the first place. I love it when people portrait their opinions as fact and then say something like this to make it look like they 'won' the debate (which is impossible anyway, since debates cannot be 'won'). Good going!

I respect the fact that you have your own opinion on things, as i've got my own opinions. But don't try to make it look like you're the only one that can possibly be right and solitarily make out that your opinion equal truth. That simply goes to show that your main reaosn for posting this is to boast about your self-proclaimed omniscient capabilities.

*NEWSFLASH*

Already been there. But it doesn't mean just because i'm mad about something that I would aim all that anger into blaming someone unless there is reason to do so.

Stop making it look like you're the only one who has ever experienced this kind of thing. Also stop making it look like you're the only one who knows the truth about it.

My claims are backed up by the fact that no one has said anything here that has refuted the fact that the game is buggy and the community doesn't care. Nor has anyone said anything outside the realm of excuses as to why I should simply accept the fact that the game is buggy. Which by the way is the entire point of of my post. If you didn't catch the point, it's this. Game developers make buggy software and the gaming community accepts it and excuses the game developer from any responsibility. Nothing anyone has said here has changed that fact and it is a fact. An opinion would be in the realm of "I think game developers make buggy software", I don't think they do, I know they do. That's called a fact, when you know something to be 100%. I challenge anyone to refute that.

The bottom line stands. Game developers are getting away with creating buggy software. Year in and year out the games get buggier and the list of excusable "bugs", a standard created by the consumer (gamers) gets longer and longer.

I do agree with you here thought "Stop making it look like you're the only one who has ever experienced this kind of thing. Also stop making it look like you're the only one who knows the truth about it" You are right, I'm not the only one who has experienced these kind of things and I'm probobly not the only one who knows the truth about it. I just don't understand why there is such a resistance to the truth from guys like you who are obviously aware of it. Why defend Firaxis and other developers like them when you yourself know the truth about the issues plaquing the PC gaming industry. How about rather then defending them, you jump on board the "no more excuses" wagon. If more people did that, perhaps we wouldn't have so many buggy and bad games being released.

 

[Bast]

How about a quick story: I bought Civ IV. When I got home, I installed it. I popped in the install disc, and started it up.

It crashed.

So I started it up again.

It crashed again.

I tried fiddling with the graphical settings and options, but no luck. Nothing I set would let me start up a game.

So I uninstalled it, updated my nVidia drivers, and re-installed it.

Bingo. Works on the first try.

Who's fault is that?

Mine.

Firaxis cannot and should not test the game on outdated drivers with known bugs in them. It was my fault for running a system with outdated divers. I refuse to feel sorry for all those people out there who couldn't run the game because their ATi drivers were several versions old. I can't even feel sorry for the people who had up to date drivers which didn't work correctly.

I know that you don't always have a choice, but I chose an nVidia card because ATi has had horribly buggy drivers for years. It's not Firaxis' fault if ATi's drivers don't work they way they claim they do. Sure, they can try to fix the problems when they show up, but to claim that they should fix all of ATi's bugs for them is just silly.

This is perhaps the problem with PC gaming. People don't want to think about their computers. They want everything to be perfect but they don't want to pay for it or wait for it. They want the newest stuff to work flawlessly with the oldest stuff even when the oldest stuff is old because it doesn't work. Whenever you buy a brand new game, you should always be updating whatever drivers you've got. If that is a hard, technical process, then perhaps you should complain to the hardware manufacturers, not the game developer who is just making a game based on what the manufacturers claim they will do.

That's very true. That's why I went out and got a new computer and now it works fine. And I got nVidia because I've always used that and they're great.

 

[Bhruic]

I must say that I don't understand some of the people in this thread. Is Civ IV the first game to have problems? Nope. That's not an excuse, certainly, I'm just establishing it to build my point.

People also seem to be aware that games, in general, tend to have flaws when they are released. I would guess that the people who are arguing against games having flaws would probably be the people who are most aware of this fact.

And yet they all seemed to buy Civ IV when it first came out.

This is the part that confuses me. You know that games require patches. I can't think of, off-hand, any game that hasn't required patches (on PCs). You are aware of the fact that Civ IV is likely going to require patches. So why would you buy it, if you are against the concept of games not being perfect on release? That's like beating your head against the wall - you know it's going to hurt, so why do it?

I think it's that point that causes me to lose any sympathy. I have a great amount of sympathy for people who ran into game-stopping problems. But the people complaining that the game isn't perfect, no, none for you. You knew that ahead of time, and bought it anyway. A perfect case of 'buyer beware'.

Perhaps, in the future, you should come back and read your posts here before you are tempted to rush out and buy a game just after release. Hopefully it will save you some headache.

Bh

 

[Atlantean]

Overall the game is great. There isn't a game out there that is flawless upon release. Did you ever try Star Wars Galaxies when it was released?

So far my copy hasn't crashed once, it installed quickly and easily, and despite some things that I miss from previous Civs is fun to play. I admit that there is room for improvement but I'm glad I can play this version while they prepare patches.

 

[DaveDash]

I must say that I don't understand some of the people in this thread. Is Civ IV the first game to have problems? Nope. That's not an excuse, certainly, I'm just establishing it to build my point.

People also seem to be aware that games, in general, tend to have flaws when they are released. I would guess that the people who are arguing against games having flaws would probably be the people who are most aware of this fact.

And yet they all seemed to buy Civ IV when it first came out.

This is the part that confuses me. You know that games require patches. I can't think of, off-hand, any game that hasn't required patches (on PCs). You are aware of the fact that Civ IV is likely going to require patches. So why would you buy it, if you are against the concept of games not being perfect on release? That's like beating your head against the wall - you know it's going to hurt, so why do it?

I think it's that point that causes me to lose any sympathy. I have a great amount of sympathy for people who ran into game-stopping problems. But the people complaining that the game isn't perfect, no, none for you. You knew that ahead of time, and bought it anyway. A perfect case of 'buyer beware'.

Perhaps, in the future, you should come back and read your posts here before you are tempted to rush out and buy a game just after release. Hopefully it will save you some headache.

Bh

It's more the fact that big named games are being released in a worse and worse condition, relying on the 'sales first patch later' matra.

Civ4 has LOTS of problems. 'Some' problems are OK, minor bugs are OK, but when so many people can't play the game, can't play it past a certain point, or have to go to great lengths to get it to work - this is unacceptable.

Maybe they're right, maybe PC's are just getting too complex to develop for. Maybe it's the publishers rushing the product. Who knows.

The point is, the people complaining, like xguild, are only asking for better products. This benefits us all.
Sitting back and accepting it will not lead to better products in the future.

 

[Frewfrux]

If you didn't catch the point, it's this. Game developers make buggy software and the gaming community accepts it and excuses the game developer from any responsibility. Nothing anyone has said here has changed that fact and it is a fact.

And the point I am making is this: The gaming industry is not the only industry in which this happens. In fact, its standard business practice. Either get used to it, or fight it at it's source. (And if you think that the source is the gaming industry you need a reality check.)

 

[King Flevance]

Age of Empires III was anything but a stable and bug free game.

There are times I wish I would have bought it instead of Civ unfornately. Someone said Microsoft bashing has become more of a fad. I will admit it is with me. Mine spawns from around 1999-2000 almost every Microsoft game then was experiencing big problems for some reason. Bugs, incompatibilty, and more. I havent even noticed recently. I agree EA can take a good title and screw up the fundamental factors.

I dont get much spare money to spend on games as money has been tight for 2 years, and I still have another year to go. (Just refinanced the house)
Hopefully, this patch coming will fix it. I do think it is horribly lame on the makers' behalf I have had to wait this long for a patch, but for the most part the waiting is over thankfully. This doesnt make it OK though. It will just mostly shut me up.
I think its crazy a TBS would be this demanding on reqs first off. I have seen people say that since the computer bases its moves off of every move you make while you make them is why it is so demanding but RTS has to do this AND have the processor 'move' them at the same time. It insane when TBS is more demanding than RTS. As IMO RTS is set up more for graphics and huge numbers of units running/fighting/dying all at once. In TBS, it seems it takes more resources to have my knight stick his sword in front of him twice and 1 person die.

 

[Bhruic]

My claims are backed up by the fact that no one has said anything here that has refuted the fact that the game is buggy and the community doesn't care.

Wait, because no one has proved you wrong, you're automatically right? You can't seriously mean that.

An opinion would be in the realm of "I think game developers make buggy software", I don't think they do, I know they do. That's called a fact, when you know something to be 100%. I challenge anyone to refute that.

Well, if I simply take the "I think" out of your statement, then no, it's not a fact. Saying "game developers make buggy software" is unproven. You could say "Some game developers make buggy software". Or "Some software made by game developers is buggy". But all software made by all game developers is buggy? I wouldn't accept that statement as fact.

Year in and year out the games get buggier and the list of excusable "bugs", a standard created by the consumer (gamers) gets longer and longer.

That's another opinion, one you have yet to prove. There are many historical examples of games that were much buggier than Civ IV. Plus, you would have to explain what this "list of excusable bugs" is, as I've never seen such a list.

Why defend Firaxis and other developers like them when you yourself know the truth about the issues plaquing the PC gaming industry. How about rather then defending them, you jump on board the "no more excuses" wagon. If more people did that, perhaps we wouldn't have so many buggy and bad games being released.

People are likely to defend Firaxis simply because you are attacking them. The reality is, Firaxis is pretty high on the list when it comes to developers these days. By specifically aiming at them, you are taking it out of the realm of "developers in general", where I think you would find more people agree with you.

Bh