Have Firaxis Abandoned BtS?

[Lord_Zath]

Sounds like a good idea, except that we would get a TON of people who play the game solid for 2 weeks, get their fill, then return it. We would also get a ton of returns by people who simply decided they didn't like it and they like shooters better, or whatever.

In the end, all those returns would drive up the price from $50-60 to $150 or more. Yuck.

So, what we need is some way to allow people to return if it is deemed legitimately buggy, but not for those other things. But, the problem is that "buggy" is subjective and no two people will say the same thing.

Wodan

Yeah maybe like a lemon law for cars.

 

[Chiyochan]

Totally agree. So much disgruntlement about the release date and then so much complaining after it came out. There's a lot of whingers out there. People need to remember that Firaxis has never been under any obligation to make a patch to satisfy the needs of people that have already bought the game. Sure it's good business practice, but I think Firaxis have been truly exceptional as far as multiple patches tailored to the requests of the community go. I for one would like to see a bit more gratitude towards them.

Gratitude? and I suppose you would show moderate gratitude if they shipped you a game that was unSTARTABLE Loled released no patches and happily walked away with their money, This happened to me. I bought BTS when it came out, they still haven't fixed the problem or gave customer support on the issue, If I where not as computer savy as I am, I would not still have either game. I immagine plenty of people without my 'expertise' (lawl ini files can be edidted) where SOL with their non functioning copy of Civ.

I payed upwards of 60 dollars for this game, All I want, is for it to WORK

 

[Fronx]

Haven't been playing BtS for a while nor been following this forum.

We were planning to start MP game with friends soon, and was surprised to notice about this disccussion about "bugs that killed MP".

I have browsed around and found the unofficial patch and its changelog, but you can quess that mere changelog isn't quite descriptive about what each change actually means and fixes.


Could some point out the most problematic bugs that would make the game broken for us? We don't care about the esthetical bugs, or "in my opinion, this should work like this" -bugs, that do not make game unplayable.

If I understood corretly, these two are the biggest problems:

- Workers from transports doing something (?) to captured cities is some (?) situation?
- Dead Colony (what ever that means?)

Are there any other game breaking issues, and what those abovementioned problems actually do, and can they be avoided in friendly game (if we ie agree to not to do anything that would theoretically break the game)?

If there is a good list / post already explaining clearly only the "big" bugs (ignoring the small bugs), sorry for this post, could someone point me to it, tanks =)

 

[mamba]

Gratitude? and I suppose you would show moderate gratitude if they shipped you a game that was unSTARTABLE Loled released no patches and happily walked away with their money, This happened to me. I bought BTS when it came out, they still haven't fixed the problem or gave customer support on the issue, If I where not as computer savy as I am, I would not still have either game. I immagine plenty of people without my 'expertise' (lawl ini files can be edidted) where SOL with their non functioning copy of Civ.

Well, for just about anyone who got the game, it worked right out of the box (as in it did start, it did contain some bugs).

I have no idea what you did to get it to not start, but that is a flaw with your machine, not with Civ. I would not blame Firaxis for this, there literally are millions of configurations out there, they cannot possibly test for all of them - and then users can still screw up.

If Civ had not started for even a fraction (0.1% or so) of the users, we would have heard of it. Maybe it did not start for you and 2 others, but that is about the extent of it.

As to there maybe being a new patch, those who would know about one would be under NDA, so not hearing about one is neither an indication that one will be made nor that one will not be made.

 

[Chiyochan]

Well, for just about anyone who got the game, it worked right out of the box (as in it did start, it did contain some bugs).

I have no idea what you did to get it to not start, but that is a flaw with your machine, not with Civ. I would not blame Firaxis for this, there literally are millions of configurations out there, they cannot possibly test for all of them - and then users can still screw up.

If Civ had not started for even a fraction (0.1% or so) of the users, we would have heard of it. Maybe it did not start for you and 2 others, but that is about the extent of it.

As to there maybe being a new patch, those who would know about one would be under NDA, so not hearing about one is neither an indication that one will be made nor that one will not be made.

for someone with nearly seven times my post count you sure are unobservent. plenty of people had my problem, probably countless more since I have extreme doubt everyone who buys civ comes here, the only way to tell is by individual hit numbers though, which as I am not the webmaster I obviously don't know.
my specifications fit the game just fine, past versions of Civ ran just fine. the bottom line is The game didn't work and they where like "dunno lol" but of course its the users fault huh. I find it very incredulous that you can sit there and shift the blame on the users for fraxis's screw up and lack of afterward support. Nothing about this glitch is related to what the user does.

 

[MrCynical]

- Workers from transports doing something (?) to captured cities is some (?) situation?

Basically there's a bug where a worker in a transport can capture a city, and simply pushes out any units that are currently in it. Because of the way units get bounced by shifting borders, this can actually cause the worker to take several defended cities in a single turn.

Dead Colony (what ever that means?)

This bug is that once a civ has been destroyed, any new civs created (colonies) will overwrite the entry of the dead civ, and inherit a lot of stuff they shouldn't. For instance they'll inherit the diplomatic state. For example; suppose I destroy the Aztecs, and some time later another civ (even one I haven't encountered yet) founds a colony. I will immediately be at war both with the colony and the civ that founded it, even if I haven't met them. All the old aztec cities will suddenly regain their old culture, but attributed to the colony they were never part of, causing huge unhappiness. The war weariness will reappear. This is by far the worst of the bugs, and happens very often in official 3.13.

The other serious ones would be spies getting teleported out of enemy territory on declaration of war, inability to found corporations under Mercantilism, and the AIs attempting to defend their cities with huge stacks of corporate executives in the late game.

I'd also add the multiplayer Out of Sync bug, but that doesn't affect everyone.

 

[Woody1]

my specifications fit the game just fine, past versions of Civ ran just fine. the bottom line is The game didn't work and they where like "dunno lol" but of course its the users fault huh. I find it very incredulous that you can sit there and shift the blame on the users for fraxis's screw up and lack of afterward support. Nothing about this glitch is related to what the user does.

You can't blame Firaxis if your computer is junk. Blame them for the real bugs, sure.

If you've put together a custom system and don't know what you're doing, then don't go blaming Firaxis. All they can be expected to do is test it on reasonable systems, and off-the-shelf computers.

They do deserve blame for not fixing the final bugs, though.

You deserve blame for not knowing what you're talking about.

 

[mamba]

for someone with nearly seven times my post count you sure are unobservent. plenty of people had my problem, probably countless more since I have extreme doubt everyone who buys civ comes here,

Maybe I just observe other things than you do. I definitely never heard of anyone having your problem, let alone countless people.

my specifications fit the game just fine, past versions of Civ ran just fine. the bottom line is The game didn't work and they where like "dunno lol" but of course its the users fault huh.

Having a PC which fits the requirements does not mean the game will work, as I said before, there are countless possible configurations and Firaxis cannot test them all, nor should you expect everything to work even if you fulfill the minimum requirements. Someone who actually is computer savy (which you claim to be) should know so.

I find it very incredulous that you can sit there and shift the blame on the users for fraxis's screw up and lack of afterward support. Nothing about this glitch is related to what the user does.

Well, you said you did manage to fix the problem. So how did you fix it ? And since you fixed it, what part of it is Firaxis fault ?

 

[Wodan]

No one will ever buy or sell games for $150 dollars or more, be real.

Exactly my point.

So, if laws are enacted that raise costs at the same time they decrease sales, what do you think will happen to the per-unit price? In your words, be real.

(and keep in mind, such laws will surely be in the U.S. only, which will affect the majority of customers, but won't do squat elsewhere)

And who ever heard of getting "enough" of a good game? Imagine saying yes, I have played civ for two weeks and I have exhausted every avenue, time to return it.

For shame!

Happens all the time. Go into Blockbuster and you'll see rows upon rows of consoles available for rent. Moms rent them for kids, they play for a few days, then return them. Likewise, there are whole chains of stores such as "Play it Again" which all they do is buy used console games from people and resell them. So, this suggestion is even worse than that... it allows the consumer to "sell back" their used game, but it does not allow the store to resell it. So, either the store or the manufacturer is going to have to "eat" the full cost of the item, with very predictable results upon the per-unit cost.

Wodan

 

[Chiyochan]

You can't blame Firaxis if your computer is junk. Blame them for the real bugs, sure.

If you've put together a custom system and don't know what you're doing, then don't go blaming Firaxis. All they can be expected to do is test it on reasonable systems, and off-the-shelf computers.

They do deserve blame for not fixing the final bugs, though.

You deserve blame for not knowing what you're talking about.

my computer is fine you jerk.

 

[Woody1]

my computer is fine you jerk.

Since you're the only one having that problem, either your computer is the problem or you are the problem. The more I think about it, the problem is most likely yourself. I think you've clearly demonstrated that is a likely possibility.

 

[Civfan333]

where'd you get it?

 

[MMV]

Since so much of the game was "player developed" - how could Firaxis be blamed for anything other than increased profits from cheap ineffective labor, lol!

 

[Ninja2]

No one will ever buy or sell games for $150 dollars or more, be real.

You know... maybe I would. If I knew that this game, sitting on the shelf, will be 99,9% bug-free with stellar patch support to boot, just maybe I would.

But then again, if Stardock can make Galatic Civilizations 2 at normal retail prices, INCLUDING great support, then why can't Firaxis? Or anyone else, for that matter...

 

[Methos]

....

....

Moderator Action: Both of you drop it. The issue can be discussed without flaming each other or anyone else.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

 

[Grump]

Wow, I can't believe how many people will jump to defend a company that purposely ships out a defective expansion. Not just a game but an expansion of an expansion that not only did not fix all the bugs that came before but actually introduced several new ones. Not only that, but the patches that belatedly come worsen the problem. Now that the company virtually ignores the game because they know people like Bhruic will fix practically everything with lightning speed and we are supposed to be grateful to them for making a profit off a buggy product.


Its not like the new civilization games are even all that different from each other that you'd expect that many bugs. Rather than try to really fundamentally improve realism, Civ IV is basically just the Civ 1 ruleset with many features piled on top. If they won't fix ridiculous stuff like the uberRambo legions of partisans appearing out of thin air, megapoison spies, helicopters that fear water, and other more serious bugs why bother with them.

 

[mamba]

Wow, I can't believe how many people will jump to defend a company that purposely ships out a defective expansion.

And I can't believe how many people claim crap like this. How do you know they did so on purpose ?

Not just a game but an expansion of an expansion that not only did not fix all the bugs that came before but actually introduced several new ones. Not only that, but the patches that belatedly come worsen the problem. Now that the company virtually ignores the game because they know people like Bhruic will fix practically everything with lightning speed and we are supposed to be grateful to them for making a profit off a buggy product.

Any software has bugs, face it. As to Firaxis ignoring them, you don't now whether there will be a new patch.

Its not like the new civilization games are even all that different from each other that you'd expect that many bugs. Rather than try to really fundamentally improve realism, Civ IV is basically just the Civ 1 ruleset with many features piled on top.

It's not like you did not know this from the very beginning.

Now I remember why I usually ignore these kinds of threads, there just are too many people without a clue talking crap. I guess I go back to ignoring it.

 

[AfterShafter]

Any software has bugs, face it. As to Firaxis ignoring them, you don't now whether there will be a new patch.

So I suppose it's more reasonable that it has in fact taken them more than five months to fix the common and simple "out of sync" error that affected many people, but Firaxis has as of yet not so much as acknowledged? Then again, I'm just probably one of those people "without a clue" and can't keep myself from "talking crap" as a result of my obvious ignorance.

 

[Wodan]

You know... maybe I would. If I knew that this game, sitting on the shelf, will be 99,9% bug-free with stellar patch support to boot, just maybe I would.

Well, I, for one, would have paid $150 U.S. for CIV for as it is. You and I are not typical customers, I believe. We should benchmark what the vast majority would do.

But then again, if Stardock can make Galatic Civilizations 2 at normal retail prices, INCLUDING great support, then why can't Firaxis? Or anyone else, for that matter...

Exactly the wrong example as a shining star of how to do things right. I bought GalCiv, played it several times, found it obscenely broken because the AI did not advance. All I had to do was improve ship tech, send 1 ship to blockade each AI planet, and blow up anything as it tried to break the blockade. I searched online communities for discussion and patches, I contacted customer service. I spent considerable effort trying to make the game "go".

Two possibilities that I can think of. Either I stumbled upon a horribly broken strategy, or else the game had horrendous design as well as horrendous testing.

So, I tried other strategies, such as avoid improving my ships and focusing upon infrastructure etc. Same thing... the AI didn't advance, hardly at all. It was just a game of solitaire with a bit of rote going through the motions of conquering the AI at the end.

I haven't played it since.

I'm sure the above will spark some responses how *I* am to blame, how I should give them another chance, that I should install some patch or something. In a way this is hypocritical, how I've done these things for CIV but, after my first attempts, have not continued to do them for GalCiv. BUT, the difference is that CIV was playable for me. GalCiv was not... I simply could not find any enjoyment from it.

Nevertheless, they got my $50. And... if there was a return law, I absolutely would have returned the game.

Wow, I can't believe how many people will jump to defend a company that purposely ships out a defective expansion.

Do you mean to say: in your opinion, BtS was more more defective than most games?

Not just a game but an expansion of an expansion

What is an "expansion of an expansion"? I don't understand that.

Now that the company virtually ignores the game because they know people like Bhruic will fix practically everything with lightning speed and we are supposed to be grateful to them for making a profit off a buggy product.

We don't know why the latest patch has taken so long.

All software is buggy. All companies are there to make a profit. Nobody said you were "supposed to be grateful" for those things. Are you supposed to be grateful the sun rises every day? It's just how it is.

Wodan

 

[Ninja2]

I never played GC1... I don't know if you actually meant GC1 or GC2? I think I bought a bundled pack of number 2 plus an expansion (it's been a while). In any case, the support I've experienced from that company is outstanding. The developer of the game is frequently on their official board. Patches and improvements for the game are seemingly always in production. I think it has great support.

The point is that this kind of service is possible, even without paying more than 40-50$.