Gamespy Interview - More Journalistic Cowardice

[Nilrim]

I wouldn't be terribly disappointed if someone other than Take2 were behind the next iteration of Civ. The devs (to whom: respect!) are catching a lot of heat that IMO ought to have been reserved for them instead.

It isn't going to happen. Take2 bought Firaixis outright, so unless they sell it to someone else take2 will be publishing Civ games form here on out.

So you can single out Take2 and the 'devs' all you want, they are one in the same.

 

[MrCynical]

Come back and comment once you are educated enough to understand concepts such as "representative sample."

ISkratch, if you have a better place to survey please inform us. As it is the forum is the best place available. No, it isn't a particularly representative sample, since at the one end it will likely have more people who really enjoy the game. However at the other end people are far more likely to come to a forum if they are having technical problems and want a fix. I'd say if anything there is a greater percentage of people with problems here than in the Civ playing population as a whole, simply because if the game works you may be playing it rather than browsing the forums.

A quick search has turned up a couple of polls, so lets have a look at the percentages.

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=134697

One of the earliest polls to start with, simple yes or no to whether it's working. 74% Yes, 26% No. This is a fairly high percentage of people for the game not to be working for it's true, I personally agree with you that the sample is not representative, though I would say it is biased towards no, but let's work with this. This poll was from late October, so Civ 4 1.0. Is it acceptable for a game to be released with 1 in 4 people suffering problems? In my book not really, but it's no worse than any other game at release that's got as good reviews. I am always faintly surprised when a PC game loads and runs perfectly, especially when it's brand new, and I doubt three out of four of the games I've bought have worked out of the box.

Onto another poll from a few days later. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=136201

Three options here on whether Civ 4 works, of Yes (56%), No (15%), Not very well (29%). This again predates the patches. This is to be honest about what I'd expect from a new game.

Now onto a more recent one, started just before 1.52 came out, but probably most of the people voting had actually got the patch by the time they did. To be on the safe side, we'll assume this includes the fixes included in 1.52. http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=147891 Rather more options here, but boils down to:

Worked from day 1: 54%
Didn't work but has been fixed by patches, etc: 25%
Didn't work, has been fixed to some extent but could use more patching: 14%
Didn't work and still doesn't : 7%

I'm quite surprised at how well the "did it work from day 1" matches the previous poll, but it seems to boil down to this. Just under 80% of people have a perfectly running game, after 1.52. 14% can play it, but could use some improvements since issues are only passably fixed. 7% still can't play and you have my sympathies, but that isn't anything out of the ordinary for a PC game, and at least Firaxis will continue to release patches.

It is this last point I want to comment on. What do you want Firaxis to do? The game is being patched, and they've fixed the majority of the problems. Unlike many companies they will keep releasing patches as long as there is a major demand for them. What more can they do? Invent a time machine and edit every copy of Civ 4 that has been sold in the past? Recall the game? That'll annoy at least 80% of the people on this forum, and probably much higher.

Blaming Firaxis is to put it mildly, misdirected. Firaxis didn't decide when Civ 4 was released, Take 2 did. They moved the release date forward a month and Firaxis had to fudge some things to meet it. Firaxis have, as you've said, already put out two patches to help get the game running properly, and I don't doubt a third is in the works. Whether it was buggy or not at release, and whether or not it should have been tested more, Firaxis didn't have the final say. Take 2 are the only ones that deserve to get the blame.

As for the game reviews, how many times have you seen technical problems mentioned in a game review? The game currently doesn't work to any useful extent on (probably an overestimate) 10% of computers. The same is from my experiences true for any other PC game, and there aren't going to be any patches to fix most of them. As I have emphasized Firaxis are much better on patching than most companies. The forum has done it's bit by telling them what needs fixing, but I don't think that any amount of ranting, threatening boycotts, inundating them with complaints or throwing tantrums is likely to get another patch out any faster.

EDIT: Nilrim, if your boss screws up is it your fault? The developers don't deserve the abuse they've been getting on this forum for mistakes made by the company that bought them. Even though they have been bought by Take 2 I think the development team is still basically the same people, and so the distinction between Firaxis and Take 2 still stands. I too would like to see them with a different company in the future, though I admit I'm not optimistic on that.

 

[Rad Chris]

Personally I think this whole problem is indicative of a wider problem. That of games no longer being about a couple of geeks programing in there basement to make a cool game, but of multibillion dollar profit making corporations like Electronic Arts mass producing generic uninspired, unoriginal, sequels as fast as they can to maximise profits.

Think of that next time you buy Final Fantasy XXXVIII or Fifa 2036.

 

[zHunter]

I'm a software tester, so I have a decent idea of what's involved in a development process.

You can be almost 100% sure the release date was dictated by the publishers, not the developers. You can also be sure that because of this, they would have to work late-nights and/or weekends to get this out of the door. And considering that, it's a wonder they got it as good as it was in version 1.00. There was only one bug that would be considered high priority, and that's the memory slow down in late-game, as that affected all users. The game not working on certain cards is medium severity because of the relatively low level of users experiencing it (coupled with the fact that games are meant to be played on more up-to-date systems).

They would not have had access to the thousands of different system set-ups that the game is exposed to once released. They probably would have tested on a low, medium and high spec machine, and only if they'd had time after testing all the basic game mechanics and balance issues. Plus, with the publishers deadlines set in stone, its usually testing time that gets eaten into as development overruns. Think of all the thousand things that need to be tested and compare what would have happened if these had gone wrong, compared to these so-called 'fatal flaws' that have forced you to write a letter to trading standards. It would have taken hundreds of hours testing to make sure every civ, building, wonder etc. is balanced correctly, and don't forget all the types of multiplayer that would have been a nightmare to test.

Overall, it is very short-sighted and rude of anyone to write letters of complaint to a company because their software did not work on your specific PC, considering all the effort they went to to make the game, and all the pressure they were under to get it done on time. Add to that, they are making patches constantly to ensure those who weren't lucky enough to be able to play the game straight off.

As for saying the SDK is to help people fix their problems, that's even more rude. They don't have to make an SDK, they could have just released the game and then left everyone to stew, so anything they release after the game being shipped is a bonus.

 

[Seriphyn]

There is ALWAYS going to be people who will find the game difficult to run, so quit whining and go get a refund. If it's too late, sell it on eBay or something.

Boycotting Firaxis won't do merde. One consumer out of thousands boycotting is unlikely to create a dent in their sales.

Frankly, I think your computer just sucks if the majority are absolutely fine with game stability and you have problems.

 

[Meffy]

Final Fantasy XXXVIII

<digression> Y'got that right. I've always found it comical how many supposedly "final" fantasies they've trotted out so far. Reminds me of furniture stores that hold monthly "going out of business, everything-must-go total clearance sales." :-D It's the advertising world, where words have lost their meaning, la de da. </digression>

 

[NikNak]

Here's my issue. I have a small graphical anomaly that shows up with some of the leader heads. (They look like they have a bit of "5-o'clock shadow".) Is it a dealbreaker? No. It's annoying, but that's the extent of the issue.

Here's where I have a problem. I routinely play Half-Life 2, Doom 3, F.E.A.R., Unreal Tournament 2004, Call of Duty, Battlefield 2, Age of Empires III, and World of Warcraft with no graphical issues whatsoever. None. You can argue that they are very different games, (and I'd agree) but in my case, it's purely a graphics snafu. I would point out that the aforementioned games are vastly more complicated in the graphics and rendering requirements, yet I and thousands like me can play them with nary a graphics glitch.

Why does this happen? Did my system fall into some weird graphics card limbo where high-end gaming is no problem, but a turn-based game can make it look like a Voodoo II?

 

[Volstag]

And, by the way, 90-95% of the general population can run the game fine (which I seriously question)? Is that acceptable by any industrial standard? This means for every thousand people who bought the game 50-100 of them got screwed. I suppose that's okay so long as you aren't one of them.

It's incredibly naive to expect every piece of software written to work for 100% of the people, 100% of the time.

I don't understand why people complain about this, since it has zero ability to accomplish anything. You have two options:

1) Wait patiently for the patch
2) Purchase a new computer/hardware
3) Return the game (this, by the way, carries more weight than anything you could write on any forum).

-V

 

[rschissler]

I have sent a complaint to the Better Business Bureau regarding the quality of their product. I encourage everyone else with these issues to do the same.

Oh come on, get real! What a frivolous compaint that is.

 

[drahnier]

Worst example of releasing an unfinished game ever: Championship Manager 4.

Yes, that was completely off-topic.

 

[Sadan01]

Worst example of releasing an unfinished game ever: Championship Manager 4.

Yes, that was completely off-topic.

Yeah CM4 was bad, but I'd probably go for SiN (in its original incarnation). That was BAD! And fixed, it wasn't. Or EA's Cricket 2004/2005. They released 2005 and it had the same bugs as in the 2004 version. They never patched either game by the way. Geez, Firaxis is really bad now aren't they?

 

[zurichuk]

CM5 was worse, terrible in fact, at least the FM part of the CM split did a good job and did a fantastic job with FM2006

back on topic, I have a laptop which has NEVER had a crash in 100's of hours play, but I NEVER managed to get it to install on my desktop, either vanilla or patched , shouldn't that be the other way around?

the laptop is a Dell gaming laptop, the desktop i built myself and is at least as good as the laptop but I've had problems since I was forced to re-format, but I know it's something i've missed / done / misconfigured/ broken hardware but then again it works with every other game, however I haven't seriously tried since the laptop came in the post).

so I can enjoy this fantastic game and simultaneously sympathise. However they did know about the problems, it says so in the manual if you look hard enough.

 

[Phoenix_56721]

opticaljim, your reply is appreciated, good to know there are others out there who can see what is really going on here.

Also, in response to the last paragraph of your reply, I actually fully intend to boycott firaxis and take two in the future unless these issues are resolved. I have attemted several times to email and call 2kgames "support", and was completely ignored like everyone else with these problems. It seems Firaxis and Take Two have chosen their course ("bury head in the sand and count $$$), and as a result I have sent a complaint to the Better Business Bureau regarding the quality of their product. I encourage everyone else with these issues to do the same.

Firaxis and Take Two: A perfect example of why so few people take PC games seriously.

Here's my point of view on the subject: Yes Firaxis rushed Civ4.........Why?

1. 2K games put pressure on Firaxis because of their financial problems from GTA mess and releasing Civ4 early would help that quarters earnings.

2. The deal for 2K games to acquire Firaxis was most likely being made at around the same time and that also pressured Firaxis to release early.

3. They wanted to release Civ4 before Age 3, to get a jump on those dollars they might instead go to Age 3.

4. Firaxis actually thought Civ4 was ready to release early.

Now Firaxis has released 2 patch's (1.08 was only out for a few hours before 1.09) in 6 months, 1.52 was released on Friday just before the X-mas weekend. All this tell me is that Firaxis is working hard to support this game, this is not true of all Dev's. People are working late nights and I'm sure their eyes start spinning in there head after 12-14 hours of looking at their computer screens.

People need to remember this when sweeping comments are made that they released a crappy product that was coded by amateurs. People also need to realize that more and more dev's are moving over the consoles contracts for games because they are much easier to develop and have a better bottom line then PC games.

So in conclusion I am very happy to have Civ4 to play on my computer its runs great on my below min. spec system. I'm truly sorry that not everyone can, but one day you may not find a turn based game such as Civ4 to play on your computer. And we all know that a game like Civ4 wouldn't be half as good on a console.

Thanks Firaxis for all you're hard work I for one appreciated it!!!

 

[Randwolf]

3. They wanted to release Civ4 before Age 3, to get a jump on those dollars they might instead go to Age 3.

AOE III still came out before CIV

In the long run isn't this practice of early releases going to hurt the market? I mean, shouldn't someone take a stand and not release until it's ready? Get a better reputation, loyal following.

Anyone willing to pay $75.00 for a smarter AI, game that is of high quality out the door not waiting on patches?

 

[Andrew_Jay]

"Journalistic Cowardice"? I think we're expecting a little too much from people who write about computer games. I don't think there's a video-gaming equivalent of Walter Cronkite, nor a need for one.

Besides, I've had absolutely no complaints at all, and I'm here on a marginal computer.

 

[Phoenix_56721]

3. They wanted to release Civ4 before Age 3, to get a jump on those dollars they might instead go to Age 3.

AOE III still came out before CIV

In the long run isn't this practice of early releases going to hurt the market? I mean, shouldn't someone take a stand and not release until it's ready? Get a better reputation, loyal following.

Anyone willing to pay $75.00 for a smarter AI, game that is of high quality out the door not waiting on patches?

Yes you're right Age 3 was released on October 18th and Civ4 was released on October 24th. I had these two mixed up....... my bad.

I personally don't believe any game of the scale of Civ4 could be released in a flawless condition, It's simply to complex not to have some bugs. The important part is that Firaxis is working hard to support the game thats what really matters!!

I bought this game expecting to have trouble running it... (I didn't have any)

I expected it to have bugs...... (It did)

I expected Firaxis to work hard to patch the game..... (they did and are)

I expected it to be the Best PC game of the Year.... (it is)

As you can see all my expectations have been meet except one, that one being able to run this game on my low end system. So Civ4 exceeded my expeditions!

 

[Undisclosed]

What bugs?

I play CIV 4 on huge maps on marathon mode with absolutely no problems!

 

[Jazz_Newton]

AOE III still came out before CIV

Only in the states i believe. The rushed date allowed them to beat AOEIII in most other parts of the world.

Personally I think this whole problem is indicative of a wider problem. That of games no longer being about a couple of geeks programing in there basement to make a cool game, but of multibillion dollar profit making corporations like Electronic Arts mass producing generic uninspired, unoriginal, sequels as fast as they can to maximise profits.

Second point... About the point that the game should've been more polished before it was released... Game companies work on fairly unique budgets. You make a product, sell the product, get the vast majority of your money in one 3-month hit, but then that money has to last you until your next product is ready to sell. Sometimes a game has to be released early just to refill the company coffers and pay the staff. I'm not suggesting that Firaxis was sitting that low in the bank, but they probably have a 'red-alert' level on their account, which might be 3 months or 6 months before bankruptcy. If the bank account was approaching that level, then the only thing to do is release the product and hope for the best.

Someone mentioned the Cricket series games... this is the perfect example. Coffers are getting low -> game is released -> Sales are less than expected, the company can't afford post-ship support and needs to start working on a new game right away to generate more revenue -> Whoops, last game was a REAL flop, need to get the new product out the door ASAP but can't afford to pay for more programmers so lets just slap a new coat of paint on the last game and shoot it out the door before we go bankrupt and lose our jobs.

Think about how many times you've been interested in a game by previews just to have the company go under late in the development cycle.

 

[Sim-Liver]

They released this game before they fixed all the bugs and they knew it. I'm pretty sure it had something to do with a marketing deadline.

"These gaming magazines do not have serious journalists, they are in a lovefest with the manufacturers and I wouldn't be shocked to find out that most of them have some type of consulting contract with them." Has anyone heard anything seriously negative from one of these guys? Has the game been structured that perfectly?

To make matters worse, these gaming "journalists" have pretty much turned a blind eye to the situation rather then admiting that there has been issues. If they were real and honest about it then it could go a long way to putting pressure on Firaxis and 2K to resolve the issues much quicker.

Guys who come on this forum and complain are doing Firaxis and 2K a great favor.

Hear Hear!!

I believed this program to be faulty from day one and tho my older system is now functioning within expected params for this title I have from the games release date stopped 25 people from purchasing the program until it has proven itself to be a viable option for their systems. I build computers for a living and have helped them as much as possible, and they will not buy until I say "Buy"! (talk about boycott)

I can honestly say that this title will eventually get to a fairly respectable state but not through the continual lacktose sucking journalism I see here, and the Apolyton site which ignore the main issues! Have you seen how many times they pump up the volume on interviews about "how great the program is". or "how high a score it has received" when truthfully it is more like 70-80 score range instead of 95% or better. Just listen to the people who do not hang around these forums and you can see the truth.

Sure the game company cannot run their software on every type of machine that might be using it, but then again so many other software titles have the same statement and get their product working perfectly the FIRST TIME!

I do enjoy the program and yes I will continue to support the program when 2K gets off their Arses and stop ignoring the phone calls. (Telecommunications work is easier if the people actually answer the phone, I know because I used to do that for a living)

 

[Sim-Liver]

Overall, it is very short-sighted and rude of anyone to write letters of complaint to a company because their software did not work on your specific PC, considering all the effort they went to to make the game, and all the pressure they were under to get it done on time. Add to that, they are making patches constantly to ensure those who weren't lucky enough to be able to play the game straight off.

As for saying the SDK is to help people fix their problems, that's even more rude. They don't have to make an SDK, they could have just released the game and then left everyone to stew, so anything they release after the game being shipped is a bonus.

What the game companies need is "RUDE" in order to understand that there is a need to fix things, and saying things like "they could have just released the game and then left everyone to stew, so anything they release after the game being shipped is a bonus". Since when is a program that I spend $50 dollars for a "BONUS" Thats plainly the kind of lactose sucking journalism I have seen here and Apolyton's site from day one.

Oh... I can see a company who wants to make any more sales of "said game" just letting everybody "stew" that would be the death of the company. period.