Rants about patch

[Exile_Ian]

First let me clarify - I'm not ranting about the patch - I'm ranting about the select group of people who have *****ed about this and previous patch.

Geez some of you people are never happy. The game had flaws - Firaxis patch it - the patch fixes problems but creates a few more - Firaxis offer another patch - that isn't 'perfect' and so you rant again!

Ok, its a little annoying to suffer the confusion of a 'botched' delivery of the patch (for a second time) - i.e. the Editor confusion - but it was immediately fixed by Firaxis (even before I'd noticed that the patch was even out.

It seems to me that if you're one of the people who's been critical of the previous patch you would be more cautious about jumping in blindly and downloading the new one so quickly. Maybe a little caution would have allowed you to determine whether the patch was going to be worthwhile for you or not.

I saw someone complaining about the amount of additional work they had to go thru because the Civ3 editor supplied in the new patch was the wrong version - aw poor baby! Gee it took me several minutes to download and install the patch and the separate editor - hardly a significant amount of time.

I've seen someone else ranting that the 'group' movement was broken if you had an army there - ok that's a bug - so don't do it! I doubt I'll even use the group movement - if I do, I'll just be sure to move my armies first - no big deal.

Same goes for the patch in general - if you don't like what it does - don't use it! If you don't like the game - don't play it! This continual whining is just counter-productive - do you really think Firaxis are more likely to concentrate their efforts on people who are so negative? (Personally I wouldn't). Firaxis clearly have responded to feedback, and I suspect that they're more likely to listen to considered rational criticism than rants.

Of course some people want their cake and eat it - "Give me a patch now" - "Fix everything that everyone wants" - "Don't issue a patch without exhaustively testing it". Make your minds up guys!

I would like to remind you that some companies don't even attempt to fix their programs - I've got a shelful of old games that had various bugs/glitches/design flaws that stopped me wanting to play them. I'm thankful that Firaxis are listening and trying to respond.

Of course I'll be accused of being a Firaxis suck-up - whatever - I've been playing PC games for longer then many of you have been born, and IMHO things have never been better for games players.

But let's keep a grip on reality shall we? Civ 3 is still a good game whatever level of patch you have - and will continue to get better. But listening to some of the whiners here, you'd believe that Civ 3 represented the greatest rip-off in history. As the vast majority of people stated in a recent poll here (of those who voted) - Civ 3 offers excellent value for money. If you accept that, any improvement (which I remind you is being offered free of charge) is welcome.

 

[Supercilious]

Jeez. Talk about "a rant"!



Maybe if Firaxis adequately playtested this game last Summer AND Fall, with plans to release it in March, they wouldn't need any patches having got it right IN THE FIRST PLACE. Ah, but the Holiday buying season beckoned; hence, out in November.

 

[Ironikinit]

Yep, and thus I was able to get an Xmas gift I actually wanted.

 

[connor]

I have not complained about the game thus far, and have immensly enjoyed it, but at this point I think I am going to shelve it till Firaxis figures out the patch and editor issue. I do not think it to far out to expect it too work without trying to piece it all together to get a work around for the editor as I edit nearly every game. Hopefully, they will fix it soon and I can get back to playing, but from now I will have serious reservations about buying so early a release next time. When I got Civ2 I played for literally 3 years straight and then on and off, definitely got my money's worth. I was hoping to do the same here with 3, but I will wait for a while and see if things actually work the way they are supposed to. I will be looking for the next upgrade to fix this.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

I enjoy this game immensely and have done a fair amount with it BUT THIS PATCH TAKES THE BISCUIT:

Who play-tested it??? The same moron who did their world map? WHO WHO WHO?

In addition to the stated problems with it they have killed the Civilisation placement tool AND civbreed AND worse have given no indication they will give us civilisation placement and unit placement EVER! Why the delay? They still have to correct typos in the city names list (my main grype that Durham is spelt "Dureham" and Marshal Zhukov is spelt incorrectly!).

Exhaustive testing is easy give it out to us that play the game and use the editor...people who can then tell them what is wrong before they release it as their in-house playtesters are pretty useless and are obviously not veterans of civ and civ-like games.

 

[brody]

Originally posted by Supercilious
Jeez. Talk about "a rant"!



Maybe if Firaxis adequately playtested this game last Summer AND Fall, with plans to release it in March, they wouldn't need any patches having got it right IN THE FIRST PLACE. Ah, but the Holiday buying season beckoned; hence, out in November.

Hate to burst your bubble, but this game is among the most bug-free games out there for it's "early" release date. Look at any other big game. I bought Diablo 2. Good game, but very buggy at first, and they're still having tons of problems on their "closed realm" games. Arcanum was another great game, but EXTREMELY slow and has many little bugs. With all the various types of hardware out there, software developers have it tougher now than they ever had back in the DOS days. The programs will work fine on one system, but not on another seemingly identical system.

Trust me on this one, I also develop software for a living. I don't even do games, and we still get bizarre issues due to different graphics cards, OSes, even sound cards which is odd since our software doesn't use sound... ANY little thing can make a MS Operating system unhappy, and with things as complex as games, you'll probably never again see a really bug-free game like you did in the DOS days...

just be glad Firaxis is even trying. They are under NO obligation to you or me now that we've spent our money, and I've seen companies that didn't much care once they'd finished the game and gotten you to pay. I'm unhappy about many aspects of the game (mainly delay between turns), but I will live, as will all the rest of you.

 

[TrailblazingScot]

The obligation is there in terms of drumming up support for add-ons and sequels...I'd hope they won't be short-sighted.

And considering Sid's name is on the box I'd have thought it would be a matter of pride.

 

[DrJambo]

Well said Exile_Ian and Ironikit

 

[Black Waltz]

I would have to say that this is a very stylish game. I haven't actually played Civ II on the PC before, but I had it on the Playstation... This one had a bug where if you traded a World Map, then it froze completly. Now you can't have any patches to fix that, but you can on this. And the faults that this game has is nothing but asthetics, and they are fixing more of them all the time.

 

[Ironikinit]

I think this thread is going to head into rant territory, and not the rant about rants sort. Modders put a lot of work in and... well, hey, y'all can reinstall 1.16, right? I'm sorry it didn't work out better, kitten.

Me, I'm not getting 1.17 until I feel a little more secure. I don't care that much about stacked movement, I never have. If I want to make horsemen upgrade to samurai I guess I can with the editor(?) Again, no biggie.

What's making me nervous are the armies turning up in goody huts.

I'm leaving well enough alone for now.

 

[wohmongarinf00l]

i can live without stack movement and sentry command.
but the whole reason i play at emperor level is that it
doesn't get to be so damn easy.
i got 3 settlers in goody huts in a row. and the guys getting
army units from a goody hut....


those are bugs that should have been noted.
oh...and the point where it shows u movt of enemy units in a square u are not supposed to see like out in the ocean or deep
in enemy territory.

 

[chiefpaco]

Right on Brody. We're not exactly playing Pac-man here. There are too many possibilities in the game for one team to test effectively. In fact, we're lucky that new fixes don't actually crash the game in most cases.

Stick with me here. It is far more effective for most companies to release their game before it is 100% tested for many reasons:
- Testing is never 100%. No matter how much testing they do, there will still be bugs. It's the nature of software. (I could end here.)
- Testing is expensive. You have to pay many good people a lot of $$ to be software testers. ($$ they don't have)
- Hundreds of thousand of people playing your game is the best testing method. If everything basically works, your consumers will test the entire game in 1 night what would take your own team a year to do.
- Bugs are often known by the developers. Their testers might have even found problems but it was decided that the fix would come in a later patch or never fixed. Why? Developers work 9-5 like the rest of us and they're only so many. Maybe if they sold more copies, they could afford a bigger work force, but hey, there's competition & piracy out there.
- As a consumer, I'd rather see fixes come out sooner than later. Half-fixes coming out every couple months or so please me a lot more than one patch 8 months after the game's release. Maybe they only fix a couple things. But at least they're trying and in the meantime, not only do I have something to play, but something to talk about!
- Each fix requires as much testing as the original game and it is said somewhere that for every fix you do, 2 bugs are introduced. Putting in stack movement is great. Do you realize how much that affects the game? We're lucky it doesn't crash anything. What's the big deal about moving your armies 1st? Isn't it a lot better than it was before? How can you claim this is a major problem? I remember threads here saying people rarely even use armies.
- We should be grateful that they're addressing gameplay issues. It is very common for companies to patch only stability or compatibility issues. I have many old games where gameplay was never addressed & I shelved the game after mastering it or finding too many exploits (NHL series, anyone?). Is anyone else surprised they are fixing exploits too? In any software project I've ever worked on, exploits are the type of fix that comes with the next version of the product, NOT patches.

What we experience here is no different to any customer who purchases any software, from games, to OSs, to office suites, to network switching, to business apps, etc...

 

[etj4Eagle]

Originally posted by kittenOFchaos


In addition to the stated problems with it they have killed the Civilisation placement tool AND civbreed AND worse have given no indication they will give us civilisation placement and unit placement EVER! Why the delay?

I fail to see what fault it is with Firaxis that a third party hack tool fails to work after a new patch is released. This is the same as blaming for them for your crack not working after a patch. Especially considering that some people were wondering if their old saves were going to be compatible. However a good hack writer will within a short period of time have updated their hack to work with the new data structures.

And with the editor, I fail to see what is giving some people so much trouble. Yes I feel for those who spent a few hours making new changes with the editor to only find that those changes could not be used. However, most of the complaints are coming from those who have not done that, people who have not even downloaded the patch. However, if they had bothered to read the front page it would all be simply clear.

And with the editor the goof up is actually very reasonable. The goof was caused by them continuing to work on the editor after they finished creating the version that was included in the patch. Ie in assembling the patch they grabbed the latest release candidate editor instead of the older one. And for those who have made files with that editor, very likely that will be the bic file format version of the next patch.

 

[brody]

Originally posted by kittenOFchaos
The obligation is there in terms of drumming up support for add-ons and sequels...I'd hope they won't be short-sighted.

And considering Sid's name is on the box I'd have thought it would be a matter of pride.

It is good business practice to spend time fixing things, but again, they have no obligation. To say otherwise means you don't understand what "obligation" actually means. Also, you're the one who's been complaining mainly about mods not working. Nothing personal, but it sure as hell isn't firaxis' job to test player mods with a totally new version of their software! In fact, it's the modder's job to test and re-release a mod/hack! Look at any other game out there (Arcanum comes to mind since I've played it recently), and most modders have to redo something when a new patch is released. That may be a bit of work, and I understand it's tough, but don't get down on the game designers for it.

As for their testing, I 100% agree with chiefpaco here (not to mention all your other points, chief!). Testing is extremely expensive and very slow. With my companies products, we only test very basic features before release. Why? Because with 1 or 2 beta testers (which already costs a small company like ours too much), testing just basic features is a month or more of time. Our customers are angry when software doesn't work, but you know what's amazing? We make more money letting them test it, even with the few returns we get, than when we've spent literally half a year working out all the bugs on a product. We lost MANY sales because we wanted to "fully" test a product once. People just weren't willing to wait for it. Those here who are complaining are exactly the same. You want a patch that is 100% tested, but you want it within 10 minutes of buying the game. And what's more, even after my company had "fully" tested that product for almost six months, there were STILL bugs we hadn't encountered because PCs are so f***ing varied!

It's the way the industry is. If you don't like it, you'll be a very angry PC game player for most of your life... maybe you should go buy an xbox or something where developers don't EVER release patches to their games.

 

[Dirk Aurel]

Just wanted to add my 2cents...


What is required here is a middle way,it can´t be that some bash the game and it´s developers at every possibility they get and others defending just about everything because they don´t want to belong to the whiners...


I think Firaxis created a good,maybe even great game.I also think that in todays software market there are way too many n00bs running about,who will constantly whine and moan,especially if they get the possibility with forums like these or multiplayer chat buttons ingame.It doesn´t take a lot to upset them,it´s more or less the same ppl every time,ppl who just don´t have any skill and will cry out "cheater"in counterstrike,ppl who will moan about graphics and will rate a game rather by optical quality than gameplay, but I think most fans of Civilization and similar games (strategy) have deserved better.They are moaning because of lacks in gameplay,at least most of them,this is positive in my eyes and very productive.Civilization and a few others have always had a special place in the gaming community.Sid Meier and colleagues have made lots of games that we keep playing over and over again,so naturally people will want to add more and more concepts to the game.We want our ideas in the game and this is where it gets sticky,the original concept of Civilization, Colonization,Pirates! were great but they have to get better if a 2 or a 3 gets added to the end.I personally disliked Civ2 a lot, there was simply nothing really new,and the things that were I didn´t like,also missed so many concepts from Colonization,left out for no reason at all,Civ3 is good though!Yet if one takes it´s evolution it´s not enough compared to what a lot of us had in mind.I for one don´t understand why the combat system has practically been unchanged ever since part one.All the same, amongst other reasons it´s good because it´s the best Civilization we´ve had so far,not because it´s perfect.

So,although I like this game loads,I don´t approve of the game being distributed without multiplayer,mp is too big nowadays to be left out or even considered as a means to make a buck more, SMAC had it too,so really don´t get it,the same goes for an altered combat system and basic gameplay evolution,the stack movement should have been included from the day it first reached the shelves.I appreciate the work Firaxis are putting into it and don´t mind so much that the patch is messed up,but to be frank,I as the consumer don´t expect anything less than them continueing working on the game,especially not from a company who´s games I like.Some here stated that they have shelves full of games which have never been patched,therefore we should be thankful,I too have more than enough of these games,which I eventually gave up playing because of bugs,would love to count them up,some were great I enjoyed them lots,but I had no other choice.A software company wants me to buy their game,like every other company wants me to buy their product,I will not buy a game fr them again,if several of their games sucked to put it plain,if I get the impression they "stole" my money or if I got the feeling they weren´t supporting the game after release. Except for the mp issue Firaxis has done very well,but this should be normal. Enough said...for now

 

[Selous]

nice post Dark Aurel, there has been little evolution in the civ series and i am astounded by some peoples attitude for what is an acceptable product standard. Civ 3 seems to becomming more polished now, 3 monthes after releace but i still dont think it is finished as multiplayer is a huge part of the modern gaming community/industry. Those of u that are saying we are so lucky that firaxis are actually supporting civ3 with patches ... come on .. wake up to yourself ... if i buy a game and it has many gameplay bugs i expect it to be fixed, and am dissapointed that i have to patch from the box or the game wont work properly, and if a company dont releace fixes for the bugs then i will never buy a game from that company ever again, because it is a very safe assumption that any future game releace will also not be supported, it is a simple equasion of company reputation

as it is now firaxis are selling sids name, and without sid there would be very few people that would know or care about firaxis, and if sid is willing to trade on his name rather than the quality of his products then people wont respect the sid name anymore. im no busness guru but im quite sure having a name for bad products is always bad

 

[MindRunner]

Originally posted by chiefpaco
Stick with me here. It is far more effective for most companies to release their game before it is 100% tested for many reasons:
- Testing is never 100%. No matter how much testing they do, there will still be bugs. It's the nature of software. (I could end here.)
[…]

Very well said!

I quite agree with you, however…
They could have been a little more honest with us, and let us know that the software was not properly tested, couldn’t they?

I’ve been in the software business too, and at least I’ve always said this to my clients and bosses when I was pressed:
“I can give you the feature right now, but I can’t guarantee you that it will work correctly. Do you still want it or do you prefer to wait a little longer and have my guarantee that it will work?” (Guarantees are not 100%, I know, but almost, after well tested)

Ant the client (us all) makes the final decision.

I quite understand that Firaxis has to make money with the game as soon as possible, and I don’t blame them for that.

I really appreciate their support, and agree with all that you’ve said.

I only complain about one thing: honesty. They could have been honest with us, and say they didn’t yet test the game thoroughly before we bought it.

Wouldn’t you like to choose that before buying something?


You know why I say this?

Because I live in Portugal, and the game wasn’t supposed to get here until January 2002, and I went into a ***lot*** of trouble to get it directly from the states. I’ll spare you with the details.
In the end I got the game from a friend of mine who went to the states, and paid about 60 Euros for it! Quite a lot, specially considering that I could have bought the game when it got here (in December) for just 37 Euros!

Worst of all, was that due to my work, I could not play the game for all those months until two weeks ago.

So what did I benefit from buying the game so soon?
1) I bought unfinished software.

What I lost:
1) 50 hours trying to buy it from the states, when it could have taken me 1 hour, if I had bought it here
2) Lost 27 Euros (almost enough for another game)

If I had the choice, I would have bought it only by now. I would still buy it, because I have every *original* copy of Civ I could buy, and I’m a big Sid Meier fan.

So Firaxis won’t loose money with me, because I will the buy the game sooner or later, and at least I knew what I was buying.

Now if I was Firaxis, I would also think about the bad marketing that all this problems are causing to the game. Will people go rush to buy its next version? I doubt that…
Will people even buy it? Not all are Civ Lovers like I am. I assure you that I will always buy any version of Civ in the future, because I just *love* this game, but not all people are so benevolent like me, I’m afraid…

Conclusion: I think they should make a better balance between earning money and satisfying their clients.

 

[Zouave]

Unfortunately, I do not appreciate paying $44.95 for a game (not including the strategy guide) to be a beta playtester for a very flawed game with bizarre concepts such as culture flipping.

 

[Desert Fox]

Originally posted by Exile_Ian
First let me clarify - I'm not ranting about the patch - I'm ranting about the select group of people who have *****ed about this and previous patch.

Geez some of you people are never happy. The game had flaws - Firaxis patch it - the patch fixes problems but creates a few more - Firaxis offer another patch - that isn't 'perfect' and so you rant again!

Ok, its a little annoying to suffer the confusion of a 'botched' delivery of the patch (for a second time) - i.e. the Editor confusion - but it was immediately fixed by Firaxis (even before I'd noticed that the patch was even out.

***************************************************

You know what? NO ONE WANTS TO hear your opinion. It would be one thing if there was nothing to rant or complain about, but there is BIG TIME. Just like the TV channel skip over messages you would rather not read, rather then waste everyone's time with these long dumb messages.
People paid good money for this game that was and still is not complete period! Firaxis should have hired testers first time around and released the game a few months later. This is all about money not about us.
Ranting I am not I am stating facts! Now please let us stop this name calling, etc that you and every other is doing about others who have a good reason to be upset! Peace!

Desert Fox

 

[Willem]

Originally posted by Supercilious
Jeez. Talk about "a rant"!



Maybe if Firaxis adequately playtested this game last Summer AND Fall, with plans to release it in March, they wouldn't need any patches having got it right IN THE FIRST PLACE. Ah, but the Holiday buying season beckoned; hence, out in November.

Well sorry for your luck, but we live in a capitalist society, and everyone has to make money in order to survive. So if you're smart, you take advantage of opportunities when you can. If you're not smart, you go bankrupt.