Firaxis: Patch coming next week

Status
Not open for further replies.
just to clarify...since i see alot of misdirected anger....firaxis is NOT responsible for setting release dates. the publisher(take2/2k/whatever games) is solely the one setting the date, plus they are writing the checks for development so the developers basically don't have a choice in the matter. 2k lost money on the whole san andreas debacle so they were trying to recoup thru civ4 by cutting down on QA time. and yes, there were patches for civ3 and civ2. and they did something completely different in civ4 so yes of course there will be bumps along the way. but i am sorry for those having major issues but its the price to pay for progress and just times in general for the gaming industry, sad to say.
 
upstart said:
just to clarify...since i see alot of misdirected anger....firaxis is NOT responsible for setting release dates. the publisher(take2/2k/whatever games) is solely the one setting the date, plus they are writing the checks for development so the developers basically don't have a choice in the matter. 2k lost money on the whole san andreas debacle so they were trying to recoup thru civ4 by cutting down on QA time. and yes, there were patches for civ3 and civ2. and they did something completely different in civ4 so yes of course there will be bumps along the way. but i am sorry for those having major issues but its the price to pay for progress and just times in general for the gaming industry, sad to say.
Click to expand...
FYI, Firaxis and T2 are one and the same company now... T2 bought Firaxis lock stock and barrel at the beginning of this month.
 
oldStatesman said:
FYI, Firaxis and T2 are one and the same company now... T2 bought Firaxis lock stock and barrel at the beginning of this month.
Click to expand...

and still it doesnt change the relationship, in this matter anyways. t2 is still firaxis' boss and like in all workplaces, the boss sets the timetable and the employee says 'yessir.' and also firaxis has to depend on t2 for QA. its really a bit ironic tho, take2 was designed in the beginning as an alternative to the poor job that publishers did with games in the traditional formula with dev and pub under different roofs. but these days they seem to be up there with atari and activision in terms of poor quality control.
 
CalvinHobbes said:
Would not have happened back in the Microprose days.
Click to expand...

:lol: Selective memory. Can you say Darklands? Civ2 crashed because I didn't have a sound card and they didn't check for that. Had to wait till they mailed out a patch disk for that one. Master of Magic, my favorite game in the ancient days but it wasn't remotely stable till the third patch. I can dig up a few more if you want me too (and this without asking the guys which ones they knew were in there that most people never discovered).
 
OH MAN@! MASTER OF MAGIC! I was trying to remember the name of that for the longest time only yesterday and concluded that I was thinking about Heros of Mights and Magic (Even though I knew I wasn't, I just couldn't picture MoM clear enough to get a mental picture). Lord that was a cracking game.
 
There's no reason Civ4 Should not run great on a system with the recommended requirements. I can run Age of Empires III very smoothly with 512MB of Ram and a mediocre Geforce Card and that game's graphics kick Civ4's ass. I see no reason Civ4 runs so sluggishly.

Err.. I mean I see not reason for Civ4 to run so sluggishly.

I mean I see NO reason...AHHH!

Any ways there is no doubt a problem with the game, not people's hardware. There is absolutely no reason Civ4 should require 1 or 2GB of RAM when AOEIII doesn't need that to run well - even in large battles - except for sloppy design and poor optimization on the part of Firaxis. People need to stop defending the indefensible here.
 
Sir_CharlesIII said:
There's no reason Civ4 Should not run great on a system with the recommended requirements. I can run Age of Empires III very smoothly with 512MB of Ram and a mediocre Geforce Card and that game's graphics kick Civ4's ass. I see no reason Civ4 runs so sluggishly.
Click to expand...

this game is RAM hungry though, 512 may not cut it.

Whats your processor?

edit: And dude, whats with the quadruple post?

edit2:
There is absolutely no reason Civ4 should require 1 or 2GB of RAM when AOEIII doesn't need that to run well
Click to expand...

This is one of the most stupidest things ive read in a while. Both games are COMPLETELY different, and cannot be compaired to regarding RAM, or anyother requirements.
 
Sorry about the quadruple post.
I know this game is RAM hungry - that's what I'm saying - this game was poorly designed and not optimized. The reality is that a game like this SHOULD NOT require more than 512MB of Ram. For me this game slows down considerably later on in the game and often locks up.

I have a P4 2.4 ghz processor. Like I said I can run Age of Empires III very smoothly and that game's graphics knock the graphics on Civ4 out of the ballpark.
 
its true, AOEIII graphics are very well done, but there is alot more complexities to deal with in this game. Texture management, AI processing for at least 8-16 civs, and a whole heap of other stuff.

There's a few games out today that require more than 512 megs of ram to run smoothly. True, while most of these are graphic intensive games, civ4 has alot to take account of, and may explain the abnormal use of RAM.

With that said, sure, I think further optimisation is possible. However, I wouldn't expect much of an improvement...
 
They had AI processing and dialog boxes and Civ management stuff in the other Civ Games - that didn't seem to cause much of a problem. I can't see why this game needs anywhere near 1GB of RAM. I think if I can get AOE3 to run smoothly Civ should have been no problem. It seems pretty good from what I've played but by the 1700s the performance goes to hell.
 
I've played on Large and Standard sizes so far.

I seriously think there are problems with the game. They should have taken the time to fine tune it.
 
hmmmm. Large maps actually cause me to lag, but standard maps are fine here (smooth throughout the entire game).

I actually heard there were memory leaks, maybe if these are fixed, performance might improve.

All games today seems to ship with some problems, this is no exception. At least its not as buggy as some games out there when released (R:TW, SHIII, Vampire).

However, hardcore performance problems are normally attributed to the users machine, not the game.
 
I'm not overly pissed off here. I'd just like to be able to play through an entire game. It just really seems like this game uses far more resources than a game like this should need.
 
Spose Id have to bite the bullit and say it would be nice if they gave the game better performace for rigs with 512 megs of ram; surely they didn't expect everyone within the strategy market to have beast machines...

Well, the patch might help things, although im not too fussed about a patch; im playing things fine :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

The_J
An interview with the Humankind beta-testers from Civfanatics
Replies
16
Views
3K
Boris Gudenuf
Boris Gudenuf
A
  • Poll
Civ VI: Now the Second Wait Begins
2
Replies
26
Views
4K
CaiusDrewart
CaiusDrewart
A
  • Locked
Civilization: Beyond Earth's creators are fixing their biggest mistakes
4 5 6
Replies
108
Views
19K
joncnunn
joncnunn
FXS_MisterKevin
An update from Firaxis Games regarding Beyond Earth feedback
23 24 25
Replies
492
Views
117K
Minor Annoyance
M
Ryoga
Fixing Quests
2
Replies
27
Views
13K
WiseGreen
W
Top Bottom