Firaxis: Patch coming next week

[Snackwell]

Even Microsoft releases games that need patching soon after release.

No! Not Microsoft!

I thought they were such a good example of how to release high-quality, secure, dependable software!

 

[Marquis Mark]

We're not saying the game doesn't have issues, we're saying a lot of users are having additional issues based on crappy hardware.

 

[ritterpa]

What game released in the past, say, 4 years has been "ready for prime time" at release?

 

[Willem]

Anyone who says "crappy hardware" is a clueless malcontent. The box CLEARLY states the requirements for this game, and if they are MET or EXCEEDED, then the expectation that the game should perform is clearly stipulated. People throw phrases like T&L around as if they have the first clue what they are - the GF2 has a T&L engine for crying out loud, there are people out there with GF4, 5K, and 6K having issues, not to mention the outright embarassment of the ATI issues.

This game is clearly not ready for prime time - which is too bad, because it is quite fun once you fight through the excessive memory requirements and touchy rendering engine to actually play the game. Oh - and yes, I have all sorts of problems on my "crappy hardware" - 1GB of RAM, Dual 2.2Ghz Athlons, 5900XT video card - FAR and AWAY in excess of the recommended specifications.

Venger

Did I single you out in that comment? Obviously there's some issues, no game that's just been put out on the market these days doesn't. But many people are complaining bitterly even though their machines clearly aren't up to the task. There was even one person carrying on about how it didn't run smoothly on a P3 900 mhz system, which is clearly below what is stated as required. Many people think that just because they ran Civ 3 just fine on a system they bought 5 years ago, that Civ 4 should run just as well. Well it's not going to happen, Civ 4 is a more demanding game resource wise, and a bottom end system that hasn't been looked after for years is just not going to cut it.

As for the whole T&L issue, it was clearly stated as a requirement and if someone's video card doesn't support it, they have to expect issues. And it doesn't take a genius to see the link between the black terrain/cheshire cat leaders and the lack of T&L support. It just requires a little bit of logic. All video cards that don't have T&L support show these symptoms, and only some of the ones that do support the technology are having these problems. It's a no-brainer as far as I'm concerned.

Yet another person to add to my ignore list. I don't have time for thimble-brains who feel justified in insulting people for no reason.

 

[ChuckLe]

No! Not Microsoft!

I thought they were such a good example of how to release high-quality, secure, dependable software!

Well, don't hold your breath for a Linux version of Civ IV.

 

[Dark Helmet]

"Me too, I don't believe that story."

As if I can make you believe. You have obviously chose not to, and the only reason I can think why is it reinforces your belief that I must have done something wrong. I did not add any hardware, I did not remove any hardware. All I did was uninstall the ATI Uninstall Utility Just like the instructions told me to and rebooted. When my computer came back up, I was looking at the WindowsXP Activation code screen. I don't know why I am bothering, it isn't like you are going to believe me - I might as well have typed gibberish.

Anyhow. "Crappy hardware" seems to be the item of choice for hardcore fans who refuse to believe Firaxis could be unscruplulous.

Pentium IV 2.40 GHz processor
Radeon 9600 Pro
512 MB RAM

And do not tell me it becase I got an ATI video card. This is ATI for God's sake - they are a pretty big video card manufacturer. it isn't like I have a ZimbabweCorp 3300 XTreme VideoCard. I mean really, this is an issue that should never have made it past Beta. Were all the Beta testers using NVidia's? You mean to tell me Firaxis never saw this 'Failure to Initialize' and 'Cheshire Cat' problems before now?

 

[Ozymandous]

Wow, that is a pretty quick patch. I wonder if this game was tested enough before being released. Did they do a private beta test at all?

I guess it's another example of marketing pushing the developers too hard to release the product. I can relate, being a software developer myself though not in the gaming industry...

Umm, go spend about 30 minutes googling Civ4 and beta testing. If you did so you'd find they had teams of outside play testers for the past 6+ months helping test the game.

And the developers didn't "push too hard" since unlike the vast majority of programmers out thee Firaxis sems to have actually done a good SDLC for Civ4. It's amazing how well things can run if people plan a bit before they just start 'throwing code' at problems.

 

[mweather]

Anyhow. "Crappy hardware" seems to be the item of choice for hardcore fans who refuse to believe Firaxis could be unscruplulous.

Pentium IV 2.40 GHz processor
Radeon 9600 Pro
512 MB RAM

Since you're above the minimum requirements, why do you think the people talking about hardware below the mininimum requirements are somehow talking about you?

 

[Rugar]

@Dark Helmet...

Well, ever since service pack 1, WindowsXP has allowed you to boot into windows for 3 days even after it asks you to re-activate through the Windows Product Activation program. On the same screen asking for reactivation is included a toll-free telephone number that you can call and get a new activation code for your system if you do not have internet access. Your rant against Firaxis would be much stronger if you could tell us:

1) Why haven't you upgraded to at least SP1? The reason this is not normally done is because of piracy since the two major pirated XP keys are not allowed to install SP1 and even once installed SP1 checks to ensure that the computer is using a valid (non-hacked, non-pirated) key. People who have not updated to SP1 which has been out a bit over 4 years are almost universally regarded as pirates. We wont even mention SP2.

2) What else did you change other than uninstalling the game and the video drivers? In order for XP to decided that a re-activation is necessary, it checks the following 10 categories:

Display Adapter
SCSI Adapter
IDE Adapter
Network Adapter (NIC) and its MAC Address
RAM Amount Range
Processor Type
Processor Serial Number
Hard Drive Device
Hard Drive Volume Serial Number (VSN)
CD-ROM / CD-RW / DVD-ROM

Of these 10 categories, >3 have to report a change since the last activation in order to require new activation. It is entirely possible that following the instructions to make Civ IV work could have caused 1 of these to report as changed (Display Adapter). If you did as you say, there must have been other changes to your system since you activated your XP. Blaming Firaxis because you accumulated enough changes to your system in 2 years to necessitate a re-activation is foolish.

 

[Willem]

This is ATI for God's sake - they are a pretty big video card manufacturer. it isn't like I have a ZimbabweCorp 3300 XTreme VideoCard.

If you look around the forums a little bit, you'd notice that ATI has something of a bad reputation when it comes to their drivers. A number of posts I've come across have complained about them. I just installed the latest version recently and I ran into problems with my machine not booting up afterwards, or coming up with a black screen. It took several hours in order to get my system running again. So they're not as reliable or reputable as you may think.

I mean really, this is an issue that should never have made it past Beta. Were all the Beta testers using NVidia's? You mean to tell me Firaxis never saw this 'Failure to Initialize' and 'Cheshire Cat' problems before now?

And no, several of the beta testers ran ATI cards on their systems and none of them had any problems. It only happened to a small percentage of ATI cards after all, it's not like it was affecting every single one of them. Something like that could easily slip through a beta test. As for the Cheshire Cat thing they probably did know about it, at least with people that didn't have T&L support. That's the compromise they had to make for the T&L requirement.

 

[Pragmatic]

...and then it made me spill my hot coffee on my pants. NO ONE TOLD ME THE COFFEE WAS HOT. And that it would burn if I poured it on myself.

[McDonalds coffee rant]
If this is in reference to the McDonalds' coffee case, I would seriously suggest you research the case, and find out just how negligent McDonalds was, before trying to use it as an argument.

You'll find that McDonalds coffee was significantly hotter than the industry average, that McDonalds had to special order custom-made coffee pots to get the coffee that hot, that their research told them that people generally drank their coffee while driving, that their own safety consultant warned them, that hundreds of prior burn cases (second and third degree burns--we're talking charring of flesh here...) had been settled out of court and swept under the rug...

Further, the old woman in question was sitting in a parked car, and was trying to remove the lid to put in some cream. The poor quality material of the cup caused the cup to collapse once the lid was removed, and the scalding hot coffee soaked the poor woman's lap. She received third-degree burns that required extensive skin grafts and therapy, and was still in excessive pain years later. Remember, we're talking about skin charred, nerves destroyed, and constant pain for years to come.

And all she wanted was McDonalds to pay her medical bills. A case that could have been settled for a few tens of thousands of dollars. Instead, McDonalds decided to play hardball. The jury awarded the woman the equivalent (estimated) of two days' profit from coffee sales, a couple of million dollars.

Excessive? Sure. The judge thought so, too. He reduced the award to around $400k. And in post-trial negotiations, they settled on around $250k, to avoid further appeals. (The numbers are based on my memory.)

My point of this post is that one shouldn't bring up the McDonalds coffee case as an example of dubious litigation and "lottery winner" judgments. The system worked: the woman's bills are paid, McDonalds dropped the temperature of their coffee to only first-degree burn range, and the judge kept things civil.

If you want questionable judgments and excessive and knee-jerk litigation, there are plenty of them out there. This isn't one of them.
[/McDonalds coffee rant]

Seriously. Read up on it. I'm sure there's even a wikipedia entry for it.

 

[tcjsavannah]

That's why I don't drink coffee. I've never been burned by spilled iced tea. Numbed, sure, but never burned.

 

[Willem]

That's why I don't drink coffee. I've never been burned by spilled iced tea. Numbed, sure, but never burned.

Hey, frostbite is no laughing matter.

 

[Chayton]

You have obviously chose not to, and the only reason I can think why is it reinforces your belief that I must have done something wrong.

The only thing you did wrong was buying XP, and after that probably getting the buggy Service Pack 2. I still run on 2000 and have no problems (dont have the game) at all, so why change if it arent broken? But oh well thats my personal view, i know that many like that XP have no clue why but thats their buisness.


As for complaining that the patches are so quick out and shows that it hasnt been tested enough. Well for those guys 2 weeks is these days considered slow in the patch scene. More and more games get patches the first few days it has been released, and now seems it to become standart to release patches at the release date or even before that, and always bigger. Like the 800mb patch for Bet on Soldiers. People should stop whining about the crap support and crap beta testing, its quiet a diffrent thing to find bugs in a simple 3d shooter ala Doom3 than to find bugs in a complex strategy game that has such a huge timezone and so many features. Guys should not forget that many times when you found a bug and fixed it you have to start the test all over again, just to see if that fix has brought up a new bug. If you expect they test it so long that there are no bugs left and it works on every possible combination of hardware than we would have a release date of Civ4 at around 2007.

 

[Renata]

I had to reactivate XP after the power supply tanked on my current computer and the tech went and replaced the motherboard as well. (Long story, but at least it was still under warranty.) I wound up having to call in by phone after the internet reactivation thingy didn't work. It wasn't like it was difficult -- annoying, but not difficult.

But anyway -- yay patch!

 

[Clown2TheLeft]

So, patch next week. Great. What's it going to fix? No one seems to know. Wonderful.

Dare I hope?

Nah...


Later!

--The Clown to the Left

 

[Willem]

So, patch next week. Great. What's it going to fix? No one seems to know. Wonderful.

Dare I hope?

Nah...


Later!

--The Clown to the Left

They're not going say anything about that just in case there's something they can't quite get done in time and still needs further work. That would be just asking for trouble.

 

[rob.derosa]

Your patch is too litte, too late.

I was having the 'Failed to Initialize' error that so many others have been getting. So I decided to follow the step-by-step instructions provided at the Civ4 website to "fix" this problem...you know, the instructions that tell you to uninstall Civ4 and my ATI drivers and the reinstall them in a certain order.

Well, I got the point where I uninstalled my ATI Uninstall Utility and rebooted. Guess what popped up when windows came back up?

"Hardware has changed since Windows XP was installed on this computer - Please Re-Activate WindowsXP".

..I have no internet at home. And much like Firaxis and their patch - I too am "feverishly" working....to find my WindowsXP package containing the information I need to reactivate.

So, congratulations! You fixed my problem! I need not worry about Civilization 4, because I cannot even reach the desktop!


I will never forget nor forgive what you did. You shipped an incomplete product to your loyal consumers counting on them buying it because it was a trusted brand...and they did. Atari did the exact same crap with Masters of Orion 3. I never got my money back from them, and I doubt I will get my money back from you. Now that you got your cash from our pockets - you will patch the game to completion and hope people forget what you did - or run out of cash and blame low sales for not being able to make the game what it should have been all along. It's ok - Atari did that exact same crap and got away with it, I am sure you can too.

I have serious doubts anything Firaxis does from this point forward will be able to redeem them in my eyes. And be assured, I will tell anyone I see looking at buying your game to stay away.

ERM lol.
activate over the phone.

 

[Shadowlord]

Why is it people get upset and call people fanboys when they state that hardware that doesn't meet the requirements shouldn't be expected to work?

Hell, you don't even have that problem and you still called him a fanboy, despite him not even mentioning problems like yours.

Realize that (some) hardware that meets the recommended settings has severe performance issues.

My computer exceeds the recommended specs. The srtest.com site said that my computer would "Rock this game." When I ran the tutorial with default graphical settings, I got all of 10 frames per second. Dropping the settings to low, restarting Civ (and of course starting the tutorial again) had almost no effect on the framerate. Locking pixel and vertex shaders to 1.4 and 1.1 respectively improved the framerate tremendously for the tutorial (although I didn't complete it due to a bug - and when I tried doing it again I was stopped by ANOTHER bug). However, on a standard-size map on normal speed, after 1800 or so, the framerate is low again:
Looking at the area around my capital city at default zoom: 10-12 FPS.
Looking at the globe view from that same place (after pressing the globe button and waiting for it to finish zooming and the framerate to stabilize): 6 FPS
Looking at Rome (in fog of war near an ocean): 17-21 FPS
Looking at ocean with nothing else on it and no land visible: 42 FPS

I can live with it, though. Actually right now I think heavy fragmentation might be somewhat to blame for the slowdown, but I'm not sure. I should have got my HD defragged before actually getting the game, but the three defrag programs I've tried so far couldn't manage to do it - They defragged down to a particular amount and then any further defragging didn't change anything (and this is with over 20 GB of free HD space, 19% of the HD space being free.). I'm trying a fourth now. (Fragmentation is approximately down to 53%, and was originally at 66% or so. However the numbers reported in the different programs are different, so who knows how much it has actually improved.)

Another note: I have not had any crash problems at all, or memory leaks, although I've been having wonder movie problems (black screens (usually) instead of movies) after 1800 or so. Since I saw a weird image at one point instead of a wonder movie, which looked like it might be a template for some interface buttons or something, I figure maybe it's a buffer under/overflow or something.

My motherboard drivers are fully updated, sound drivers too, I'm using the right DX version, etc. The only thing not updated is my video card drivers, since 81.85 broke antialiasing (at least here). I haven't tried uninstalling the drivers explicitly and then installing 81.85 so perhaps that would fix it, but I got tired of installing new drivers and then reverting repeatedly, so I'm not going to bother (I also tried the 81.87 beta earlier). 61.77 works perfectly for everything, and I got no performance improvement in the two games I tested with (NOLF2 and the FEAR demo) when I tried 81.85 and 81.97. (NOLF2 runs excellently on maximum settings, FEAR runs like crap on minimum settings. Dropping world detail in FEAR doubled my framerate, by the way.)

P.S. I'm not asking for help here, just saying this to point out that if you think that everyone with problems is below the required or recommended specs, you are definitely wrong.

I also tested what happens if I disable pixel and vertex shaders entirely with RivaTuner, just to see what happened: It caused the terrain-is-super-bright bug (except at the zoom level one below the lowest cloud level - zoom out to the first cloud level and then zoom back in one, it seemed to skip it when zooming out), and the water-is-black-most-of-the-time bug, which also proves that those specific glitches are NOT due to cards lacking T&L, but due to problems in the fallback code for dealing with cards without shader support.

 

[Dark Helmet]

I did get the 3 day grace-period when the Windows Activation pop-up occured. I shutdown my computer in frustration after that, and ever since when I power on my computer it flat-out tells me to put in the code or I can go screw myself. I lost those 3 days in 3 hours I guess.

My home computer hasn't had internet access in about a year. I got out of the AirForce and have had a lot of moving around to do (and still not done finding my niche in civilian life). As for what Service Pack, I think I might have 2, I need to check though really. When I was online I enjoyed a router and firewall so I wasn't very paranoid of the internet (not a whole lot at least).

I am dispirited and frustrated and I got off on the wrong foot here, and I will be the first to admit I could have done a whole lot of things differently. The point I am trying to drive home is that had Firaxis spent more time on their product, I would never have had any of these problems. Am I wrong for taking this stance?

Hardware changes? Since installing XP I have -

Put in a DVD/CDROM Burner
Removed 512MB of Ram (used to have a Gig of RAM but cannabalized one stick of RAM for another computer).

..and that's it.

Now, from what I have read on WindowsXP, if after 3 or so hardware changes on your computer, the Activation Code pops back up. When I uninstalled the ATI Uninstall Utility, to my understanding it removed all drivers and everything else video card related right? So when I rebooted as far as windows was concerned my videocard was new hardware. Either that or Windows decided to screw with me at a very coincidental moment...which I doubt.

Yeah, I see the 1-888 number to call Windows. But is there any point in calling if I can't find the package/booklet that came with the disc when I purchased it? Or is all I need my serial key? It is so much more complicate now than it once was. I have also been told the techs on Microsoft's end aren't very pleasant to talk to - prone to accusing you of being a software pirate.