Straight from the horse's mouth - recommended hardware specifications not enough ?

[oldStatesman]

Civ4 is about as far from sucking as any game I've played. I'm not saying that because I worked on it. Other way around! I would never have agreed to work on it unless I was confident I'd be able to say that by the end. - Sirian

I just want the opportunity to decide that for myself!

Unfortunately, the game keeps CTD so often I cannot really enjoy it...and I don't want to keep playing it this way so I can judge it fairly...

Hence my frustration...

It could be the best thing since sliced bread, or it could be average. I really don't know. I am not panning the game on it's game play merits, or lack of them...I want to be able to judge that myself, and I can't give it a fair shake in that regard right now due to the technical difficulties.

(FYI, I have a middle of the road system ...Athlon 2400 CPU (2GHZ), 1GB RAM, Radeon 9550 AGP 256MB...nothing special, right around the recommended.)

I hope the patch does stop the CTD's issues... reasonable slowness is not a real issue with me. My only complaint there is that the possibility of a slowdown in the late game on larger maps was never really mentioned in the pre-release days. Anytime that question was brought up, it was either glossed over ("Don't worry, everything will be fine"), ignored, or shouted down.

I trusted the info I got from 'official' and 'quasi-official' voices here and on other sites...and didn't worry. Now it seems that there is an issue with the larger size games...and I feel a bit decieved.

Please don't take that personally, it is not meant that way. I am more angry that Take2 did not have the courtesy to put a disclaimer on the box that recommended system may experierence issues with larger games. I have bought software in the past where this type discalimer was in the fine print on the box....For example, I believe the early Madden Series (or maybe it was Earl Weaver Baseball) did this - saying the game would run with the recommended specs but the 3d video views would be disabled. They actualy had high endspecs on the box.

Perhaps with the increasing requirements for 3D and such, it would be good PR for the industry and game companies to go to this model...instead of publishing minimum and recommend specs, they could also publish the 'high end' specs that are required to play the game optimally at all levels included in the release.

Just my thoughts.

 

[Commander Bello]

[...]
Civ2 fans absolutely jeered Civ2's pathfinding, and its flaws undercut AI performance. They also jeered the AI. So Civ3 fixed the problem, adding TRUE pathfinding to the game. Now the AI is competent and then some, but that comes at a cost: true pathfinding is a blunt instrument that eats CPU cycles like mad. This is exponentially worse on larger maps, leading to folks like the Original Poster in this thread panning the game for being slow. So Firaxis responds to Civ fans and DELIVERS what they hungered for: a smarter AI. And some slam the game for being slower. "UNACCEPTABLE," they say.
[...]

Sirian, again I have to ask you to kindly enlighten me and my poor mind:
What kind of pathfinding is taking place in midturn of a RTS? What kind of pathfinding or whatever other functionality is taking place when you are calling up the military advisor and it takes 20 - 30 seconds for him to respond and to display the location of your 35 units?
What kind of path finding is taking place when you turn on the grid at the very first turn?

 

[ChuckLe]

...snip

It is threads like this one that force developers off the public boards because they can't trust fans as a whole not to abuse the things they have taken time to write. When fans twist things and try to use a developer's words to cause harm to the product, in a fit over not getting their own way on every detail of the game, the developers have to protect themselves, and that usually means halting interaction.

I don't know whether you care about that or not, but while fans often talk about whether or not companies are worthy of their loyalty, companies often look at reactions like yours and think, "There's no way to meet the (ridiculous) expectations of many fans, so why go the extra mile?"

If gamers want better games, then they had better figure out the difference between the good games and the bad ones, and support the good ones. If fan expectations get too far out of hand, to where no company can profitably please their fans, then the whole industry could dry up and blow away. Of course, that's just my opinion. I don't speak for Firaxis.


- Sirian

also:

Huge Terra is not for the weak of machine. Seriously.

Interesting indeed.

If you can't meet the 'ridiculous' expectations of many fans, then don't dupe those same fans by publishing 'ridiculously' inadequate hardware requirements prior to and within the actual game release!

The most worrying aspect of this, is that you apparently do not even see this as a problem. While you may regard this as nitpicking, it most certainly is not. It refers to the core of the game, and which Firaxis and all the pre-sales promotional videos made the most fuss about i.e. the 3D graphics engine.

It seems pretty clear to most people (apart from developers it seems) that acknowledge that it is a problem, that the 3D engine is woefully inadequate and not fit for the purpose.

All this thread has done is highlight a fundamental flaw in the game, that only appears late in the game. It is still a major flaw, notwithstanding the myriad other problems with the game.

So, if a major player like yourself doesn't regard it as a problem then it's not likely that any other developers will either.

That's a surprise and IMO a shame, but no big deal. It is after all just a game. A very profitable one. Lucky for some eh.

 

[Zhahz]

My machine crushes the recommended specs and my machine is in great shape (built it myself so I know what's in it, optimized for gaming, latest drivers, 20+ years of programming and IT, blah, blah, etc).

Yes, Civ IV has nice graphics - but it simply doesn't compare to more demanding games like FarCry, HL2, Doom3, UT2k4, EQ2, etc graphics-wise. It's graphic intensive but it doesn't push the same way as other games. I'm failing to see why Civ IV should be such a resource hog and so sluggish at times (for me it's inconsistent - I can have a totally clean game or I can have a game degenerate into a slide show like experience that requires a reboot - with the exact same game settings).

The game is generally very playable for me but I still think that the code/engine/performance doesn't quite fit the level of quality and stability I expect from Firaxis and the Civilization franchise.

Now that I'm playing Civ IV daily I reboot my machine frequently just on general principle (to increase the odds of having a trouble-free Civ IV session next time I get going), and generally speaking prior to Civ IV I would almost never reboot because my PC is so stable and even the most demanding games would never have problems.

Even on normal sized maps I often save frequently because I'm worried that the game will crash. I've only actually had a few CTDs but when the game performance gets iffy I'm always expecting the worst.

Love the random maps <grin> (seriously though - they're vastly superior to anything previous), love the game mechanics and all the changes and new things, but having a love/hate relationship with the engine.

 

[microbe]

If Civ4 had less graphics, the reviewers and casual fans would pan it. You simply cannot please all of the people.

Yes you cannot please all of the people, but we all know that CIV is not a game that put graphics as its top priority historically.

This has changed in CIV4. The very top reason that forbids many people from playing the game is graphics.

Graphics needs improvement, but you have to admit that it has come at a very high cost, and to me it's not balanced given the number of players who had been waiting and waiting for the game and found out they couldn't play it when it finally came. You'd never feel the frustration if you had never encountered this problem personally.

The last thing is that just as some people get tired of all the whining and complaining, I'm also tired of seeing people dismiss those complaints by saying "most people are happy and playing, so your complaint has no standing". This kind of "it works for me" attitude is exactly the number one reason of causing bugs in a software.

 

[upstart]

by time you have completed 7 or 8 hours of game play it will get bugged down no matter what.

7 or 8 HRS of gameplay?? are you serious? who would have a game running for that length of time? i dont think the beta testers were required to have the game running for that stretch of time, for good reason... and whats the problem with stopping and starting? with a decent computer like yours it takes all of what? 30 seconds to quit and run the game again? is that 30 seconds you dont have? and anyways i need two hands to count the number of recent games with memory leak issues...that have been fixed by patched. if youll give firaxis a couple of weeks to perfect the patch instead of forcing them to rush it out im sure you can then play it for 7-8 hrs like you wish.

Moderator Action: Public discussion of moderator actions is against forum rules. Comment removed.

 

[Sirian]

Even on normal sized maps I often save frequently because I'm worried that the game will crash. I've only actually had a few CTDs but when the game performance gets iffy I'm always expecting the worst.

I tracked down the main source of CTDs. There's an issue with overlapping commands: if you issue another command too quickly to a unit whose animation is still playing, after being moved... CTD.

Should be fixed in the patch.

Meanwhile, with hundreds of thousands of players playing, nobody came up with the answer to this one ahead of me (or they didn't post about it). So I am feeling pretty good about my tester skills today. (Testing the game for hardware compatibility wasn't any part of my responsibility. I have only ever tested or played the game on my own machine.)

It's one thing to see the game crash, and something else to figure out why it is doing so. I hope most folks can see how something this obscure, which is not reproduceable until after you isolate the cause, can slip through testing. Sometimes bugs like this don't exist for 95% of development but slip in at the last minute, when people are fixing or working on something else. It's a big game.

Meanwhile, until the patch comes out (any day now?) when you move a unit, let its animation finish before you give it another command. That should clear up 99% of the CTDs. I haven't had a single one since I figured this out, and I was having them in droves last week, including four on the same turn, once.


- Sirian

 

[warpstorm]

If fan expectations get too far out of hand, to where no company can profitably please their fans, then the whole industry could dry up and blow away.

This is exactly what happened to the military flight sims. The level of detail required to please the hardcore fans meant that the sales could not support the development costs (our office is full of the developers of Jane's miliary sims).

 

[vyapti]

This SHOULDNT be like this. And they didnt test the game well enough, but put it on the market too early. I hope we soon get some patch.

We were up in arms when the game released A DAY late. Would you rather play with a game that was released too early and has some bugs or play with your thumbs for a month or two while they work out the kinks.

I, personally would rather have the game now, knowing that it will be patched and that it will occupy my time for years to come.

 

[I_batman]

I have for the most part tried to remain neutral in my postings about issues here. I have been trying to help out as I can, and be proactive, and not complain needlessly.

But I have to speak out on this.

Reading Sirians' remarks, I feel a huge sense of dissappoinment. I respect Sirian greatly, he is a class act. He makes his points well...and that is where my problem lies.

..snip

Amen brother.
I think that I have to accept the powerful machine I am purchasing will not be to run Civ IV, but to run huge maps of Civ III better.

 

[oldStatesman]

I tracked down the main source of CTDs. There's an issue with overlapping commands: if you issue another command too quickly to a unit whose animation is still playing, after being moved... CTD.

Should be fixed in the patch.

Meanwhile, with hundreds of thousands of players playing, nobody came up with the answer to this one ahead of me (or they didn't post about it). So I am feeling pretty good about my tester skills today. (Testing the game for hardware compatibility wasn't any part of my responsibility. I have only ever tested or played the game on my own machine.)

It's one thing to see the game crash, and something else to figure out why it is doing so. I hope most folks can see how something this obscure, which is not reproduceable until after you isolate the cause, can slip through testing. Sometimes bugs like this don't exist for 95% of development but slip in at the last minute, when people are fixing or working on something else. It's a big game.

Meanwhile, until the patch comes out (any day now?) when you move a unit, let its animation finish before you give it another command. That should clear up 99% of the CTDs. I haven't had a single one since I figured this out, and I was having them in droves last week, including four on the same turn, once.


- Sirian

OMG!!!!!!!!!

This is great news...hope it gets posted prominently! ( A sticky!)

This is the first time I have seen anyone with connections to the game admit that there are CTD issues caused by the game engine ..and why they are occuring! And a solution to boot!!!!

This goes so far to alleviate my frustration...all most of us wanted was some acknowledgement there was an issues ...and that a fix was being sought after. Instead, we have been bombarded by posts from fanbois saying there is no issue it is our machines...which for a lot of us is entirely false. And silence from T2.

Thank You Sirain, this is the best news on the game I have seen in weeks! And the temporary 'fix' - to wait for animations to finish completely - is an easy non-technical one!

 

[Psyringe]

I probably won't be heard, but I'll try again nevertheless: Relax, people. Don't get personal because of a game.

Regarding fans and the gaming industry: They are both victims of forces they cannot really control. Due to various reasons, it is crucial for a publisher to create high expectations among the fans. High expectations *do* create revenue that in turn will be used to pay the developers for making (and late rimproving) the game. However, high expectations are also easily disappointed. Which leads to threads like we're experiencing in this forums right now.

If the game is good, this phase will eventually wear out. And Civ4 is, in my opinion, a *very* good game. Which leads to another thing that's being discussed here: Did the testers do their homework?

I think they did. Actually I think the beta testers did a great job, *but* part of that has been ruined by things they couldn't control. The game has far less gameplay bugs than I expected at release date. The game has a *working* multiplayer mode and even look well balanced in multiplayer - a vast improvement over Civ3, which had no multiplayer originally and then a rather embarassing release of a non-working multiplayer expansion. In my opinion, the beta testers did a very good job on Civ4.

If I were a Civ4 developer, I'd be frustrated now ... because then I had been working my third most important body part off for months, or even years, to help creating a game that was worthy to become the king of Civ games. And I succeeded. But then, totally unnecessary mistakes creep up. Things like mislabeled CDs, french tech trees, and hardware issues that weren't present in the beta test and must have been introduced by something very late in the process (my guess is that the beta testers worked on un-pak-ed files and that the pak-ing broke something for some Radeon cards which worked before; but I'm only guessing here). These problems created, for a substantial subset of people, a totally unnecessary bad first impression. And first impressions go a long way (and Firaxis knows that, you can tell that when you see how much work they put into the main menu).

Anyway, as I said, this initial phase will eventually wear out, like it did for Civ3 and for many other games which *are* good enough to stand the test of time. And i know that the people at Firaxis will continue to work on their flagship for quite some time.

 

[upstart]

i feel sorry for sirian...i hope you ppl dont ruin this board for him and other developers to actually come here and discuss the game...i know plenty of other games where devs wouldnt come within a 100 ft pole of touching a forum...

and this is the thanks he gets?
sheesh.

 

[ombak]

All this thread has done is highlight a fundamental flaw in the game, that only appears late in the game. It is still a major flaw, notwithstanding the myriad other problems with the game.

What flaw??? The game, as intended, can be played on recommended machines. The developers also happen to know that many players will likely want lots of customization. This often involves bigger maps.

Do you think it would be reasonable to base recommended specs on the most difficult-to-process customizable maps/games?

If not, do you think it would be reasonable to state recommendations for these customizable games? If so, where do you draw the line? How many combinations of map type/map size/civs do you want different recommended specs for?

Sirian is right, you distorted what he said. You are nitpicking and basically removing yourself from what is realistic with map-generating games such as Civ.

 

[Sirian]

Sirian, again I have to ask you to kindly enlighten me and my poor mind:
What kind of pathfinding is taking place in midturn of a RTS? What kind of pathfinding or whatever other functionality is taking place when you are calling up the military advisor and it takes 20 - 30 seconds for him to respond and to display the location of your 35 units?
What kind of path finding is taking place when you turn on the grid at the very first turn?

If you are in to using Virtual Memory and your hard drive is slow, response will be sluggish when you call on something that has to access the hard drive.

The pathfinding affects any change in trade routes (learning new map info, opening or closing borders, pillaging tiles or razing cities, etc) and is the main cause of slowdown between turns. Every AI unit that is moved will make a pathfinding check. Some will be long routes, and there may be a lot of units in play. One reason that Civ4 actually performs BETTER THAN Civ3 on my machine is that CPU, and not RAM or graphics, is my machine's weakness. Pathfinding hits the CPU directly. Civ4 has fewer units, because they cost more, so fewer units means fewer pathfinding hits each turn. Between turns performance is much better.

My reply was aimed at someone complaining about five minute waits between turns. That's on the pathfinding, mostly. Your complaints are more in the nature of needing more RAM, and maybe a faster harddrive or better vidcard.

The Graphics are responsible for slowness on turning the grid on and off, or loading up a screen with an animated leaderhead. Notice the F4 screen uses large icons, still pictures? That's about better performance! Civ4 does lots of things to improve performance, but I can't really talk about them because I can't break my NDA. Pathfinding issues are public domain: Soren talked about them at length in regard to Civ3, in the past. I knew all about them before we ever communicated directly! So I can discuss those.

I have an aging graphics card and a dinosaur of a computer, and I don't have problems that bog the game.

In fact, I've spent enough time chatting this afternoon, and I want to get back to some Civving. I hope you don't mind. It's not that discussions aren't fun, but, well... This hasn't been the funnest thread I've ever posted to.


- Sirian

 

[Artagel]

Thank you for some good information, Sirian. It is nice to get some patch information from someone official, although a notice somewhere more prominent might be a good idea.

 

[Sirian]

OMG!!!!!!!!!

This is great news...hope it gets posted prominently!

This is the first time I have seen anyone with connections to the game admit that there are CTD issues caused by the game engine ..and why they are occuring!

This goes so far to alleviate my frustration...all most of us wanted was some acknowledgement there was an issues ...and that a fix was being sought after.

This isn't the only issue, but most of the others that are hitting lots of players are related to specific machines (hardware). Those are out of my hands. I can only find stuff that happens on my own machine.


- Sirian

 

[Sirian]

Thank you for some good information, Sirian. It is nice to get some patch information from someone official, although a notice somewhere more prominent might be a good idea.

I'm NOT official. Civ4 has shipped and my contract is done. I don't now, nor have I ever, spoken for Firaxis or Take Two.

If I find a bug, I report it, Soren fixes it. That's been true for years now, which is part of how I got to work on Civ4 in the first place.


If I -had- turned this up as part of any official duty, or while running an unreleased build, I would be required to keep it confidential. I take that -very- seriously, so don't get me in to trouble here for something I didn't do wrong. Thanks.


- Sirian

 

[oldStatesman]

This isn't the only issue, but most of the others that are hitting lots of players are related to specific machines (hardware). Those are out of my hands. I can only find stuff that happens on my own machine.


- Sirian

Understood...but for those of us whose hardware should not be giving us problems it still is a relief to know that this particular issue is being addressed!

Again, Kudos,

...and please, post this prominently in the Bug and Tcech forums...it will really help to raise a lot of spirits!

 

[vyapti]

If gamers want better games, then they had better figure out the difference between the good games and the bad ones, and support the good ones. If fan expectations get too far out of hand, to where no company can profitably please their fans, then the whole industry could dry up and blow away. Of course, that's just my opinion. I don't speak for Firaxis.

I couldn't agree more. My favorite games of all time (Football Pro and Civ) were great because of the fan community. Firaxis put out a game where player interaction is expected and necessary. I'm not sure that a developer could show its fans respect in any better way.

As far as meeting everyone's expectations, the developers of Football Pro tried to put out a product (FBPro 99) that exceed their ability and it killed the franchise. I'm happy this isn't happening with Civ4. I want a game to be profitable, it means they'll continue the series.