The editor again and again...

[Sid]

Brad, you don't know and that's fair enough when you're spare time/unpaid on this project. If not you, who?

Ah, I know … how about a statement from our friendly folks at MacSoft? C'mon, Al Schilling and Nate Birkholz, I bought your Stronghold game yesterday -- it's great -- but I'd love to do more business with you in PTW + equivalency in PC patches. The Editor is integral to all that, and I trust Brad Oliver to deliver, despite the ridiculous circumstance in which he is placed.

This delay in announcing the future for Mac users in one of the great gaming franchises does a great disservice to MacSoft and its parent, Infogrames. It's all very well to announce a strategy of being top in a range of consoles and platforms, but you have to take care of the people who have already shelled out their hard-earned in the first place. One of the reasons I bought Civ3 was because of the ongoing benefits of the franchise and the possibilities of endless entertainment. People who buy interactive computer games do so because they invest the equivalent of ten or so movie tickets and get a better return than twenty hours of sitting in a darkened theatre. OMG, I think I may be gushing and repeating what I have written elswhere, but I do think that MacSoft should live up to their side of the 'bargain'.

 

[willywonka]

Well, I can't vouch for anyone else here, but I can tell you I would be willing to download and use (without complaint or support request) the beta the instant it is available.

 

[gfeier]

Originally posted by willywonka
Well, I can't vouch for anyone else here, but I can tell you I would be willing to download and use (without complaint or support request) the beta the instant it is available.

As I'm sure we all would - and provide some quality feedback, too (hint, hint).

 

[Beamup]

Amen to that! A public (or at least semi-public) beta seems to me like an excellent idea.

 

[Brad Oliver]

Originally posted by willywonka
Well, I can't vouch for anyone else here, but I can tell you I would be willing to download and use (without complaint or support request) the beta the instant it is available.

I think (but don't quote me) that the intention is to release a beta of the editor, mainly because there's no feasible way for it to get widespread QA at this late a date after Civ3 has shipped.

As for MacSoft, don't be so quick to point the finger at them. They did contract me to do the editor, and so far I haven't delivered it. Granted there have been some extenuating circumstances, what with the nearly non-stop patching to Civ3 and the Civ3 editor and the fact that I've had other projects that have more firm deadlines, but it's not fair to point the finger to MacSoft. I feel that they've been fair to me, and more than patient with the entire situation. If you really want to dish out blame, start with me please.

Brad

 

[gfeier]

Sounds promising, Brad. I look forward to you starting the beta editor thread with the download link real soon now.

I imagine if we do that and pass a note to the Mac gaming sites, we could be seeing a lot of new blood here.

 

[Sid]

OK, it's be kind to MacSoft day! I'm enjoying their Stronghold too much to stay mad.

A Beta Editor will certainly re-vamp some Civ3 interest too.

 

[Beamup]

Originally posted by gfeier
I look forward to you starting the beta editor thread with the download link real soon now.

Heh, I think we all are. Although we do seem to be managing to remain polite and not keep continually badgering Brad insisting to know when it'll be ready - maybe the maturity level here is higher than on most boards?

 

[gfeier]

Originally posted by Beamup


Heh, I think we all are. Although we do seem to be managing to remain polite and not keep continually badgering Brad insisting to know when it'll be ready - maybe the maturity level here is higher than on most boards?

The maturity level is much higher here than on most of the boards I frequent. Since everybody here is a Mac user and a Civ player, well... I guess that's the cream of the crop!

 

[frunobulax]

Originally posted by gfeier
Since everybody here is a Mac user and a Civ player, well... I guess that's the cream of the crop!

 

[ejday]

Originally posted by gfeier


The maturity level is much higher here than on most of the boards I frequent. Since everybody here is a Mac user and a Civ player, well... I guess that's the cream of the crop!

Now, if only we could convince Westlake of that. Brad's got the gig and we're waiting on him (Godspeed, Brad), but if Westlake was serious about support after the port, they'd hire another body. They probably look at it as: by contracting as few people as possible, we're saving money.
I'm sure Brad is the swiss army knife of coders, but if you only contract one guy to do ten projects, all of the end results are going to suffer (and we, as Mac folk, suffer along with them). For our treasured interface and user experience, we already pay a higher outlay for both hardware (on average) and software (check Civ3 at Amazon; Mac is already $10 more than the windows version).
Okay, so it's established: we're driving the computer BMWs on an information highway clogged with Ford Fiestas. Problem is, we're not getting BMW service. How do we fix that?
Here's my suggestion, and loathsome though it may be, it may be the only way... We've paid for everything else, let's pay for this (and similar, apparently low-volume projects) on an incentive basis.
1) They ask how many people would be interested in matching the latest patch (and downloading it for, say... a buck. $1).
2) What would it be? 100 downloads? 1000? 10,000? How many copies sold? Who is connected enough -and paying attention- to d/l the patches? Making a living is what drives programmers (just like the rest of us), and green (not smiley faces) is the best way to show appreciation. $1 a patch to get the dang thing out gives them a little extra incentive outside p.o.'d posters or calling Tony Soprano.

Okay, so let's say we shelled out $45 at CompUSA for the original. $1 for v17, a buck for... was there a v19? $1 for v21. $1 for v29. Voila. An extra $3-5 over the next few months, and presto: we have parity with the WinTel folk. Timelier parity. I, for one, would be willing to shell out for it.

Does this sound sane? Any takers? Thoughts?
EJ

 

[ChrisB]

Sid wrote:
>>Brad, you don't know and that's fair enough when you're spare time/unpaid on this project. If not you, who?

Brad Oliver wrote:
>They did contract me to do the editor, and so far I haven't delivered it.

I hope this word from the "horse's mouth" puts a final end to all the talk that Brad is doing the editor "for free", please.

ejday wrote:
>Okay, so let's say we shelled out $45 at CompUSA for the original. $1 for v17, a buck for... was there a v19? $1 for v21. $1 for v29. Voila. An extra $3-5 over the next few months, and presto: we have parity with the WinTel folk. Timelier parity. I, for one, would be willing to shell out for it.
>Does this sound sane? Any takers? Thoughts?

a) No, it does _not_ make sense to pay more - as someone noted Civ 3 for Mac costs more than Win Civ3 - and then pay more. It sounds like a pun, but is a bad idea.
b) As a foreigner, paying $1 would cost me a whole deal more than $1, quite possibly $6-$8 or more (overseas paymet fees/exchange fees etc). On top of a $39 game that additional $5+ is not so much. But your $3-$5 becomes $18-$40.

 

[Txurce]

I think Brad did the later patch updates for free, thereby slowing down his progress on the editor. I am grateful that he did this, as I don't care about the editor, and would much rather have 1.29.

Not being a foreigner, I would be happy to pay $1 (or somewhat more) for 1.29. But somehow I don't think it will be enough.

 

[dojoboy]

I've been playing around on the PC version of the editor on my school laptop. Its very cool! I'm working on creating a standard size map. It is time consuming because I want it to be geographically correct. I just can't figure out how to make rivers, yet. I've not played around with the game rules, maybe later.

 

[ejday]

Originally posted by dojoboy
I've been playing around on the PC version of the editor on my school laptop...

You're a teacher, man. You know it's not nice to tease...

Originally posted by dojoboy
It is time consuming because I want it to be geographically correct. I just can't figure out how to make rivers, yet. I've not played around with the game rules, maybe later.

Okay, forgive me for being a voyeur... but what's it like? Is it an "Earth" map or just something that "could be" real? Pangea? Classical earth? (you know, the whacked-out, skewed but not-bad-for-no-satellite-imagery of the 1600's?) Someplace in the Degobah system?

EJ

 

[Brad Oliver]

Originally posted by ejday
Now, if only we could convince Westlake of that. Brad's got the gig and we're waiting on him (Godspeed, Brad), but if Westlake was serious about support after the port, they'd hire another body.

This comment is way off the mark for so many reasons I can't even begin. Please - stop this speculation and "what I would do" before everyone goes crazy. There were too many circumstances out of everyone on the Mac side's control for this finger-pointing to do any good. And before someone tries to read that as "blame Firaxis" - don't. In today's society, there seems to be a line of thought that every bad thing needs to be someone's fault, and this simply isn't true.

As I said before, if you want someone to blame, point it at me - I can handle it. If you send flame-o-grams to Westlake or MacSoft or Firaxis, you'll just make a bad situation worse.

Brad

 

[Sid]

OK, this thread is about the Editor and I think you've clarified that situation well, Brad. I will just repeat that I would like to use the Editor when it comes out and I'm one of those who believe it will enhance the game. I agree with you about 'blame'; it's like guilt, totally useless after the event, except to make plans for the future.

Slighty off-topic: I still think it would be good customer service + good common sense + a courtesy for MacSoft's Nate Birkholz to make a statement regarding a 1.29 patch and PTW. Either we have a game that is of ongoing value -- because of parity with the PC community -- or we don't.

 

[dojoboy]

Originally posted by ejday
Okay, forgive me for being a voyeur... but what's it like? Is it an "Earth" map or just something that "could be" real? Pangea? Classical earth? (you know, the whacked-out, skewed but not-bad-for-no-satellite-imagery of the 1600's?) Someplace in the Degobah system?

EJ

Well, its my first editor. Yes, I'm an editor-virgin, well...was! To me, its very user friendly, especially as I discover shortcuts.

The map I'm working on is not an earth map. Its fictional. What I meant by geographically correct is in regards to mountains and rain shadows, rivers and floodplains, weather pattern movements (based on earth) and how they may affect vegetation. I really like a fan-made map recommended by Sid where certain resources were located on distant lands. I'm trying to include something along the same lines just a little tougher. Such as placing saltpeter, coal, aluminum, oil, and uranium on outlying lands, perhaps forcing civs to compete vigorously for them.

 

[Brad Oliver]

Originally posted by Sid
Slighty off-topic: I still think it would be good customer service + good common sense + a courtesy for MacSoft's Nate Birkholz to make a statement regarding a 1.29 patch and PTW. Either we have a game that is of ongoing value -- because of parity with the PC community -- or we don't.

He made such a statement a while back. The gist of it, IIRC, is that future support hinged on how well the editor was received. The post was made to this forum.

Brad

 

[dojoboy]

Does backing up the Civ3 mod.bic simply mean to make a copy and move it to a folder? Does it need to be moved out of the Civ3 folder?