New Civ 4 patch coming up?
- Thread starter LordRahl
- Start date
Tarkhan
King
Battlecruiser 3000 sucked even when it worked correctly. It's only known for its bugs these days. If it had worked, it would be forgotten like most games from that time period.
And I agree about Windows 98. It's utter crap. ME was marginally better, only due to the addition of System Restore.
When win98 screwed up, save your time and re-format. When XP screws up, most times, you can revert to yesterday and keep going.
And I agree about Windows 98. It's utter crap. ME was marginally better, only due to the addition of System Restore.
When win98 screwed up, save your time and re-format. When XP screws up, most times, you can revert to yesterday and keep going.
TheLopez said:
Dunno who you supposedly asked, but Daniel Shirk of Firaxis stated in this very thread here at CFC that indeed there WILL be further patches for vanilla cIV...
player1 fanatic
Fanatic
Danicela said:
Not a chance.
XP barely ever crahsed, while blue screen of death is common with 98. Also, as someone who has friends who still use 98, I'm pretty sure it's much inferior to XP. You can't even use USB drive easily with 98.
Danicela said:
And the Amiga was really the best, right?
Win95/98 was such a horrible piece of junk, even back in the days. No protected memory, stoneage filesystem and an environment that allowed anyone to do anything at anytime. The headaches it gave you, omg.
player1 fanatic
Fanatic
Danicela said:
1) But much less often.
2) Usually just the DOS games, which today can be played with emulators
3) Never seen such thing...
Edward The Big
Bob Crane's Tripod
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2005
- Messages
- 204
Danicela said:
Don't they have to release a patch for the Mehmed II glitch? I know of the fix, and it works for me...But I would like to see Mehmed actually work...
player1 fanatic
Fanatic
That would be Warlords patch material, not for base Civ4.
?
No, it's much more stable, and less buggy than xp.
I know a game which doesn't work on XP and it's not DOS.
This is only one exemple I have in mind now :
In 98, to go to drivers, you have just to right click on Workshop icon and Properties, know you have to go in panels, search buttons etc.
?? what are you talking about ? why did you quote me?
Why not for the stand alone?
WTH is this?
Quotey
Emperor
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2006
- Messages
- 1,459
Why not for the stand alone?
........
Mehmed II isn't IN Civ Vanilla.
I know a game which doesn't work on XP and it's not DOS.
Thanks for telling us what. Wait, is it a Mac game?
No, it's much more stable, and less buggy than xp.
Examples, please.
........
Mehmed II isn't IN Civ Vanilla.
I know a game which doesn't work on XP and it's not DOS.
Thanks for telling us what. Wait, is it a Mac game?
No, it's much more stable, and less buggy than xp.
Examples, please.
WTH you use this out-of-subject word "Vanilla", is it the Vanilla plant? No, so use "stand alone", which is the real description expression.
Ok, you talk about something that is in the expansion, I wanted to say it as a generic thing and I didn't know about what he was talking about particularly so I say it because Civ4 should be patched.
No -.- i'm not stupid.
It works on 98.
But not on XP.
This is just absurd.
Making a new version of a program which lacks things there were in the last version ... like in Civ4 heh..
I only know by Experience, that there are much more buggy things in XP than in 98, XP can bug on much more many things.
Wrong, I just fight against wrong ideas, YOU want to dig in our skulls and put in them false ideas.
I don't have any false ideas, only trues, you should know it.
You are totally wrong.
King Flevance
Deity
Wow this thread has went a bit off track but was a fun read anyways. 
As for the whole 98 vs. XP They both have things I like about them and things I can't stand. But since I have used XP for the last 4 years, it has grown on me.
As for Firaxis, I have now lost any last shreds of hope I had been holding out for them in regards to Civ 4. I tried blaming Take 2/2K at first but this false information is seriously not groovy. In Shigga's thread he started before Warlords was released, players began discussing if Warlords had anything to offer anyone who bought it.
This link he posted is the thread.
Around post #43 the idea is raised that Firaxis will not support vanilla once Warlords is released and it esculates from there. Now, you can say what you will about how today companies don't support 'older' versions of software but this game is only 6 months old and now the people who bought Civ 4 vanilla and gave this company revenue to work with on an expansion are now being forced to buy that new expansion to fix the software they originally bought. But, moving on - after this discussion became more of the topic of the discussion in the thread later, Dennis Shirk came in and stated this in post #147.
a) Saying what people want to hear to try and hold on to a few more customers regardless if you mean it or not. (i.e. Lie to people for desired result.)
OR
b) Not having any idea WTH is going on in regards to a product your company is responsible for. And this goes with ALL Firaxis people if we have these two conflicting answers.
You have one guy saying there will be patches. You have another guy saying there won't be patches. Which to me suggests you have a company that has no idea what they are going to do because every decision is ONLY based on profit for them. To hell with those of us who have already given them our money.
I understand companies goal at the end of the day is to make money. But when did quality take a back seat? Defend the idea if you want to, but I don't see the man who sold me a broken radio I managed to get working myself for 50 bucks a better business man than the man that sold me a radio that was in fair condition upon buying it and he stops in every 6 months to make sure the radio is doing fine because he knows how to fic radios. Man #2 will end up having me buy more from him. Man #1 had better never come knocking on my door again.
All that said, one day I will end up with Warlords. However, it won't be for a long time. Civ 5 may be out on shelves before I ever buy it so I may never get it. I don't know. But I am not going to be buying any Firaxis products for a while from now. Because I know is what is really going on here is a company sold me a game and now it is up to me if I want to pay for the fixes. I now see Firaxis as a company that punishes people for buying their products right out the door. Because if they release an expansion, they will just drop support for the original and make you have to go get the expansion for any fixes. Basically, only the first couple patches are free. Then you have to pay.
As for the whole 98 vs. XP They both have things I like about them and things I can't stand. But since I have used XP for the last 4 years, it has grown on me.As for Firaxis, I have now lost any last shreds of hope I had been holding out for them in regards to Civ 4. I tried blaming Take 2/2K at first but this false information is seriously not groovy. In Shigga's thread he started before Warlords was released, players began discussing if Warlords had anything to offer anyone who bought it.
This link he posted is the thread.
Around post #43 the idea is raised that Firaxis will not support vanilla once Warlords is released and it esculates from there. Now, you can say what you will about how today companies don't support 'older' versions of software but this game is only 6 months old and now the people who bought Civ 4 vanilla and gave this company revenue to work with on an expansion are now being forced to buy that new expansion to fix the software they originally bought. But, moving on - after this discussion became more of the topic of the discussion in the thread later, Dennis Shirk came in and stated this in post #147.
Now in the context it was posted in it suggests there will be patches for vanilla. Now, I think maybe the statement is 100% true if you ignore the topic inside the thread. All he says is Civ 4 will remain independant of warlords for future patches. He just doesn't mention that Firaxis isn't going to make any. Crafty? If you think so. I think it is just another prime example of Firaxis either:dshirk said:It was mentioned a few times in this thread that Warlords will be required for future Civ 4 patches. Where was this ever mentioned before? As an FYI, Civ 4 will remain independent of Warlords for any future patches.
a) Saying what people want to hear to try and hold on to a few more customers regardless if you mean it or not. (i.e. Lie to people for desired result.)
OR
b) Not having any idea WTH is going on in regards to a product your company is responsible for. And this goes with ALL Firaxis people if we have these two conflicting answers.
You have one guy saying there will be patches. You have another guy saying there won't be patches. Which to me suggests you have a company that has no idea what they are going to do because every decision is ONLY based on profit for them. To hell with those of us who have already given them our money.
I understand companies goal at the end of the day is to make money. But when did quality take a back seat? Defend the idea if you want to, but I don't see the man who sold me a broken radio I managed to get working myself for 50 bucks a better business man than the man that sold me a radio that was in fair condition upon buying it and he stops in every 6 months to make sure the radio is doing fine because he knows how to fic radios. Man #2 will end up having me buy more from him. Man #1 had better never come knocking on my door again.
All that said, one day I will end up with Warlords. However, it won't be for a long time. Civ 5 may be out on shelves before I ever buy it so I may never get it. I don't know. But I am not going to be buying any Firaxis products for a while from now. Because I know is what is really going on here is a company sold me a game and now it is up to me if I want to pay for the fixes. I now see Firaxis as a company that punishes people for buying their products right out the door. Because if they release an expansion, they will just drop support for the original and make you have to go get the expansion for any fixes. Basically, only the first couple patches are free. Then you have to pay.
Why ?
No, a "good" developper team MUST continue to patch stand alones after having made an expansion, see Blizzard, when they do a patch for warcraft III, there is the same patch for both Reign of Chaos and Frozen Throne, but for RoC it's a patch where there are things to patch for RoC, and in FT, the remaining other things that are new for the expansion.
There are still bad things in Civ4, and Firaxis have to fix them, no matter if there is an expansion or not.
So why does Blizzard made the 1.14 Starcraft patch some days ago ?
Why do they patch Warcraft III also for remaining multi player bugs?
They don't care of money in these case, but maybe they want to do "good", or maybe as they make tournaments, they don't want there are bugs in their games...
THis is an error, see Blizzard, they still make patches for Warcraft, Diablo II, and Starcraft (10 years after!), so it just shows that Firaxis is not a good team in all the senses you can understand the word "good".
For 2 units, for Unique buildings, for some new civs, for some new leaders, new scenarios, few bugs solved, and raggish things like that ?
I don't say I'm against new units, new civs, new scenario etc. But they are not enough in numbers to justify a so big cost, when for 40 you get 50x times things as much.
It's a too big cost for this expansion.
King Flevance said:
I'd really like to see an official statement on this. I did not think of it before you mentioned it... but I won't accuse Firaxis nor Mr. Shirk until I know what's the name of the game. If this should indeed turn out to be as crafty a statement as you suggested it's another kick in the .... of the fan base. Hm. I wonder if I should send a mail to the "Ask Sid"-Editor? EDIT: done.
Similar threads
