Real Scenario editors

[flyingcursor]

First let me say that I do really like Civ III. IMO the best of them all.

We all have the gripe about the lack of a real editor.

Interestingly enough, the Empire Earth team also promised an epic editor environment. And guess what? They delivered on their promise!

So I'll be shelving CIII until the developers decide to give us what they promised WITHOUT paying another 30 bucks for it.

 

[Zippo]

OK I'll admit I've never played Empire Earth or similar games.. in fact, Civ3 and Civ2 are the only turn-based strategy games like these I've ever played, and Civ2 was so long ago (it seems) that I barely remember it. Civ3 is the only one of its kind that I've actually taken the time to play with and edit.

Anyway, I'm curious what you mean by "a real editor." It seems that the hacked editor is fairly powerful given the amount of hardcoded crap that Firaxis has in civ3. True, there are definately rough spots but what exactly are you looking for?

 

[knowltok]

I think what he is looking for is what I am looking for, the ability to place cities and units on the map. To create that perfect WWII scenario, or to recreate a favorite book.

Maybe that isn't what you were looking for, but I was shocked not to find it.

 

[Zippo]

OK I can see where you would want that... to be honest I never tried doing that with the current editor. Hopefully Firaxis will come up with a patch/new editor that gives us those abilities.

 

[Wyz_sub10]

The hacked editor is cool and works well for units, but does not work for adding civs.

There are still some hardcoded things that the editor doesn't address. This is compounded by the fact that there is no 'validate' function that flags missing pieces, etc.

The real problem, though, is the lack of functionality in making scenarios. The cheat function allowed for this in civ2, but it's sorely missing here.

Mind you, if the game had shipped with a few scenarios, this may have helped.

Civ3 is a great game in most ways, but the franchise owes its longevity to the modding community which has been left out in the cold here. IMHO, they dropped the ball on this one.

 

[knowltok]

I'd agree. They promised a great editor, but in truth the CIV2 one is currently better. WTH? Well, I suppose that they'll get around to it...maybe.

 

[Sultan Bhargash]

I have to admit I am spoiled because Civ 2 Multiplayer Gold was my first Civ game experience. The editor on it is incredible - you can easily rearrange everything - once you get tired of the dozens of scenarios that come with the game and hundreds more downloadable ones that are EASY to install into it. So I was dissappointed by the Civ 3 Editor, lack of scenarios, and lack of Hotseat or Internet multiplayer options. I also dont see how they can fix up anything as democratic as Civ 2 MGE since the animated units really takes it into the realm of genius programming and not the simple Mac Doodling of Civ 2. When Civ 2 MGE comes out they will need to make the leader photos easily subbed for JPEGS and give us a Unit Gallery to improve our choices. I would also shell out money (but please not more than 25 bucks) for a scenario pack if I knew we were going to get at least a dozen full-fledged scenarios with animated Hirohitos, Genghis Khans, George Washingtons, etc. etc. and new victory conditions, tech trees, etc. (New World was one of the fullest, best of the Civ2 MGEs), as well as a better editor.

 

[Charles]

I think after reading all your posts in this forum, you've all hit the nail on the head on this one. Firaxis goofed big time! But what picks my butt is, did they do this because they're programmers are not trained enough, or did they do this on perpose? Either way it looks bad!

The editor stinks, I've tried using it to its fullest ability, and I got several game crashes, they dont even have limits on thier pop-down menus in the editor, so you can enter values beyond what the game actually allows. Seems like a really *lazily* designed editor. They obviously didn't put much thought into Civ3. Sounds like they're using Civ3 to make money, rather than create impressive games! Yeah! they sure blew it.

Charles.

 

[Rotpar]

My first impression was: "WTH? No minimap?!" It must be HELL to make real world maps not being able to see what it all looks like! I was disappoined when the rules editing didn't let you add, now it's been sorta fixed with the Hacked editor, but NO city/unit placement?! As it stand you cannot make ANYTHING other than maps/rules mods. I loved Civ II MPG's boatload of scenarios, from WWII to the Civil War to Feudal Japan to Dinosaurs and X-COM.

 

[Charles]

Oh I totally agree, the editor completely sucks. I know some local programmers that could take the source code for Civ3, and put Firaxis to shame. Even now, hackers and mod-designers are in the fighting effort to re-scale Civ3, and so far they're making progress. But its pretty bad when people have to take up the slack where Firaxis left it. In short, Civilization II is still better than Civilization III.



Charles.

 

[Strategos]

Now I don't follow the machinations of the gaming industry quite as closely as some, but I have the common sense to differentiate between companies that make games for gamers, and companies that make games for money. Sorry Firaxis, but it appears you're sliding yourself right into the latter category.

I'm sure many of you will agree with this sentiment, but for those of you that may not, allow me a small parable.

Does anyone remember the Ultima series? The majority of you may not also be role-playing fans, but I'm sure some of you may are. Richard Garriot (aka Lord British) was one of the best programmers/story-tellers the genre and the industry could've ever hoped for. He founded his gaming company, Origin, and set about creating a legacy of games that was to last almost two decades. For many die-hard role-playing fans, Ultima was one of the most engrossing, thought-provoking, and downright fun games ever invented. Owing to its red-eye inducing and sleep depriving qualities, one could go so far as to say that it was the Civ of the role-playing genre!

But then the inevitable occured...

After years of making his own games, the way he wanted to and within a timetable he was comfortable would be long enough to ensure a high level of quality and balance, he sold out to Electronic Arts. I'm not an EA fan, and so am not familiar exactly with their caveat of software, but it seems EA "produces" nothing but sports games! Was Lord British so blinded by the all-powerful green-back that he couldn't see that sports had NOTHING to do with role-playing, and that EA would only destroy Origin as his platform for "creating worlds?"

Apparently he was. After a hurried, unbalanced, and ultimately unsupported release of Ultima 8 (one of the worst Ultima games ever), the allstar EA-Origin-Lord British triad commenced work on the VERY LAST ULTIMA EVER. Ultima 9 was to be the culmination of a decade's long legacy. British was optimistic from the get-go that this game was to surpass all previous Ultimas in every aspect--this despite that at least half his team from the get-go (again) was routinely employed on another related EA cashcow project, Ultima Online.

Long story short...Richard Garriot followed the money, sold out, and left millions of fans in the loop. His company is officially dead, his loyal staffmembers (however few) have been laid off, Ultima Online still can't compete with Everquest, and the Ultima series is a textbook example of what a gifted, gamer-oriented company should not do! Sid, so far, at least from my perspective, it seems as though you're following this same path. You joined up with a new company (though admittedly they showed their expertise in SMAC and are in fact NOT a sports game company), you released your ground-breaking, everything is different game WITHOUT beta-testing. You included next to no support for a vigorous modding community--possibly the most important group of people as far as keeping the Civ experience fresh. The anxiously-awaited patch is two days overdue, AND it looks like there will be no TRUE scenarios until your "expansion pack" comes out in "a few months." Oh yeah...you never update your homepage, either.

Okay, okay. I like Civ3, and I've said that before in another thread. If I didn't, then I wouldn't waste my time pissing all kinds of people off here. Trouble is, I see some dangerous parallels here, and the last thing I need is for another passion of mine to end up like another Ultima...

 

[Charles]

You said it Strategos!

It's the *money* that ruins them! And the contributing factor is the idiots that "support" sh_tty games! Like people rating Civilization III over 5, for example! How are we supposed to get Sid and Firaxis to own up to any flaws or broken promises when we have people saying "ya ya the game rocks!" ... "oh Civ 3 is sooo cool!" I mean gimme a break... open your eyes people, Civ 3 is full of disappointment. Ofcoarse I would be in my glory if I could sit across from the game designers in the board room, and tell them what I really think!

Charles.

 

[Wyz_sub10]

Strategos,

I agree with what you said. Just a little note, though. Electronic Arts made some amazing games and was a real leader in a variety of genres. EA Sports was the division that made only sports games.

EA owns or has owned a variety of companies (inlcuding Bullfrog and Jane's), and still produces stuff like The Sims and Command and Conquer.

I mention this because I think Garriot was probably ready to jump to a big platform, and EA was a pretty good choice at the time, IMHO.

Not defending or attacking, just clarifying one point.

 

[Strategos]

Wyz_sub10,

Actually, I should probably say that I hadn't really done my home-work on EA at all. I didn't realize they owned some quality labels, though now that I think about it, I guess a major publisher would have to. Thanks.

Charles, you have a great point. Though there's plenty of us who do enjoy the game, there aren't that many that think its perfect. C'mon, if we all thought that the game was the be-all, end-all of Civ's (like many of us had expected) then we'd all be too busy conquering the world to post messages here. And though I doubt this upcoming patch will exceed our expectations, hopefully it'll be a step in the right direction. We'll all have a better idea in just a few days...

 

[Charles]

No game is perfect, because "perfection" itself is an illusion, nothing in life is perfect, otherwise we'd have nothing to complain about. ... I guess it's about where each individual places his or her expectations, and the height of those expectations. And I guess the point I'm trying to make is that "Firaxes" over-extended themselves by telling the public (before the release of the game) how good Civilization III was going to be. And in doing this, they fuel our "expectations" for a let down.

But here is the thing guys! If game companies have all this power and financing to design these impressive games, how come fans and consumers always think up ideas of how the game could be better, shortly after its release? Do they lack ideas?, are they lazy? or perhaps only in it for the money? How could any reputable game company continue to do business this way and still succeed in the market?

Still really confused and somewhat frustrated.

Charles.

 

[Wyz_sub10]

I once heard from a story from a developer dealing with this.

There was a component his team wanted to add to a project and he felt that it was something the fans really wanted. It was going to impact the project minimally (dollars and time).

The publisher said 'no' and the developer, in relaying the story, said that he could not understand for the life of him why the idea was nixed.

Go figure.