Patch v3.13 change list

Worth the wait?


  • Total voters
    601
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
Now I got the sense of this poll: Keep the community busy. If we have a platform for complaining about the new patch, noone annoys the developers. Nice gambit
 
Its good that someone communicated. The problem is he said "We are done with the patch, but unfortunately we will not be able to release it this week as we had hoped." That made it sound like it would be released any day now. It would have better if he had just said something like "it might take a few more weeks for various reasons" then nobody would be holding their breath.

Hear hear, spot on.
 
Does this mean that they will be "testing" the patch for ~357 weeks, and it will come out on July, 2014. ;)
One day before CIV 5! :goodjob:
lol I hope not. But in the case of Warlords the final patch was BTS.
And Vassals still don't work right, but at least they finally completed Blakes AI.
 
Och well, it'll be any day now. I am getting addicted to that "Check for Updates" button in Civ4: BtS ... I keep clicking it every time I am at the main menu.

I'm quite amazed at the disappointed people in this thread, who are so disappointed because the game should have been perfect at release (i.e. maybe released just before Christmas...if we're lucky) and that because it isn't, they should have had the patch written immediately. Do you think the programmers at Firaxis are mindless robots?! They need their food, sleep, rest and stuff-that-isn't-work activities just like us.

I for one am glad that they are releasing such a large patch, and telling us about it in advance. It's keeping us informed, and good communication goes far.
 
Patches have a tendency to show up late on a Friday, so maybe it'll turn up today...

Could certainly do with another word from Alexman, as the "delay" comment suggested it would be out after the weekend. Communication was going quite well, but if the patch doesn't show up today, they need to tell us what's going on.
 
Och well, it'll be any day now. I am getting addicted to that "Check for Updates" button in Civ4: BtS ... I keep clicking it every time I am at the main menu.

But that means using the infamous 3.03, doesn't it? I won't risk it, tried it once and got the known bugs right enough, so now I just check this thread often instead of using game update.
 
I'm quite amazed at the disappointed people in this thread, who are so disappointed because the game should have been perfect at release (i.e. maybe released just before Christmas...if we're lucky) and that because it isn't, they should have had the patch written immediately. Do you think the programmers at Firaxis are mindless robots?! They need their food, sleep, rest and stuff-that-isn't-work activities just like us.

I speak for myself but from what I have read from others I know that some 'complainers feel similarly...

So for the record... Some of us are not expecting a 'Perfect' game upon release. We can live with patched tweaks and improvements. But we do expect that the major features work well enough to justify their inclusion into the game. And it is the major features which justify a new expansion. When these new features don't work proper then people have cause to gripe. Different people will have different opinions on just how well these features work. But it is very clear that a large enough group of civers are passionately disappointed to justify such a major patch.

My frustration with BTS begins with how the Civ3 expansions and patches were handled. It grew with Civ4s initial release and then Warlords put me over the top. In my opinion the biggest feature of Warlords (Vassalage) still does not work well enough to use. I disabled it long ago. Then in BTS it is Still flawed. Perhaps the Vassalage improvements in this next patch will finally justify using this main feature of Warlords. I hope so. Then the Improved AI in the Warlords patch was an incomplete version of Blakes AI. The creator of it explicitly stated as much. Imo the patched AI was worse than the original. Then despite a great many changes to Blakes AI, Warlords was never patched again. Then there was Civ4s memory leak and that blasted MAF. There is more but that is enough to make my point.

And that point is product dissatisfaction. And since 2k games does not maintain forums for their products, this is where consumers come to express their opinions. 2k and Firaxis use CFC and Apolyton to keep in touch with their fan base. The fact that we have a point of contact with the developers is good for all concerned.
 
Och well, it'll be any day now. I am getting addicted to that "Check for Updates" button in Civ4: BtS ... I keep clicking it every time I am at the main menu.
I learned back with vanilla Civ4 that its wise to wait a week or so before updating the game. Unfortunately PBEMs etc sometimes forced me into it. I am glad not to have updated to the last patch. And I will wait at least a week to install v3.13. For me the wait to finally play some serious BTS is a bit longer.
 
Its amazing that some people complains about people complaining on BTS.

A trained monkey could find the most obvious bugs in the Civ4 editions.
Did they test the game at all before launch? :rolleyes:
 
Its amazing that some people complains about people complaining on BTS.

A trained monkey could find the most obvious bugs in the Civ4 editions.
Did they test the game at all before launch? :rolleyes:

Arent you complaining about people complaining about people complaining? :crazyeye:
 
Dear Sirs

I strongly object to the silly way complainers are being complained about in this program... *bonk*
 
Those responsible for complaining about the complainers complaining have now been sacked...
 
The beatings will continue until morale is improved.
 
White Elk makes good points about so-called complainers being correct to do so here, seeing as 2K and Firaxis do not have their own forums through which dissatisfied customers can make their point. It's not my style to aggressively complain as some prefer to do, but their points are obviously valid. However, just because they are valid does not mean that they are the only point of view on the subject and so the "complainers about the complainers" have equally valid viewpoints.

But my question is also this: What could we actually do to ensure that we as customers receive products off the shelf at the standard we desire? I have no definitive answers myself, but do have a rhetorical question.

1) How many people here, especially those who are dissatisfied with all of Civ's off the shelf standards, actually purchased the games on their day of release? I ask this because of how my own purchasing habits have changed over the past few years. I never purchase a game on day of release as I now know that it will without a doubt be buggy and patched within the first month at least. And when I do purchase a game, the first thing I do after install is go online and look for patches. This is the current format of the PC games market.

Surely the only way that we can change such trends is to affect initial sales figures. Yes, I know that by rights we should be able to purchase a game without major bugs on day of release. Yet that is just not realistic anymore and no amount of complaining to publishers will change this unless these complaints are backed up by keeping our money in our pockets for a month or two after release.

Any thoughts?
 
Agreed.

I can relate to what you said, my game purchasing habits have changed in the same way. I never buy a game on release day, with two exceptions: a) I can play a demo that shows me that I'll like the game in its current state, or b) the game is made by Firaxis or Stardock. These are the two companies that (so far) have never disappointed me in their dedication to patch and improve the products I bought from them. (This is no invitation to botch things up however ... there was a third company in this category, but it lost my trust due to marketing lies.)

I actually wonder why so many people choose to buy products they haven't tried yet from companies they don't really trust.
 
My thought is that since rhetorical questions are, by definition, asked in order to produce an effect or to make a statement rather than to elicit information, we shouldn't answer. :nono:

(Besides, one of my favorite jokes is: "What kind of fool asks a rhetorical question?":confused: )
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom