Warlords- What is it good for, absolutely nothing ugh!

[DaviddesJ]

Facts are neither good nor bad, it's one's interpretation of the facts that is positive or negative. Thus your characterization of a thread containing criticism as a source of "objective truth" is (as you surely intended it to be) incorrect and quarrelsome.

 

[hs1611]

Mine was a rhetorical answer, which you would have understood if you were paying attention (it's not that long, just 48 words).

Ouch!! That hurts, the irony, stabbed with my own sword.
Since your answer was rhetorical, I apologize if I came across as sarcastic, but my first impression of your answer was that you were explaining the facts of life to a child, a particularly ignorant, obnoxious, naïve and dumb child, which I assure I am not (a child that is, I am not impartial enough to comment on the rest). For that I apologize.
I read your post (#296 in answer to my post #292) a second time to try and understand it, I assure I paid attention both times, and I came to the conclusion that, just like I stated previously (post #306), you were really not answering my rhetorical question (which was quoted incomplete and out of context) but merely using the part that suited you to show that Firaxis is great and everybody should just count their blessings and stop complaining.
I still think my money well spent on CIV4, and I really don’t think Firaxis sucks, but I also still think that the game is far from perfect and much of its value is derived from MODS. But I’ll save that for my next post.

PS: I considered not answering but couldn’t resist. I love a good debate.

 

[hs1611]

On my first post on CIV FANATICS (thread Welcome, New Member!, post #1535) I said that I still was not sure if I preferred CIV3 or CIV4. That question is now irrelevant because I am not planning to go back to CIV3. I’m addicted to some of the MODS for CIV4 now and do not want to give them up. Here is something to consider though, I never felt the need to use MODS for CIV3 and, therefore, I never did. On the other hand I don’t even consider going back to vanilla CIV4. I have to thank Firaxis for making a game that is so easy to mod, but especially all the modders that have gone to all the trouble so that we can play the game as it should be played.

As for troubles with CIV4, I never experienced more than a few CTD, which doesn’t bother me that much because I never expect a piece of software to be released free of bugs. One major difference between CIV4, and any other commercial game, and MODS though is that the first are supposed to be finished products made by professionals for money and the latter are always Works In Progress made by amateurs in their spare time for fun. What is acceptable in MODS is not acceptable in commercial games, like costumer support (modders almost always answer your questions, just check the threads) and fixes (modders almost always try to fix the bugs on their releases).

Warlords – yes, I am going to buy it. I am looking forward to Vassal States and the Mongol Camp Unit. I tremble to think what the MOD community is going to do with it. That’s why I think my money will be well spent on Warlord.

PS: Just a stray thought, I wonder why Firaxis included religions on CIV4, I still don’t know what they bring to the game, except more culture / happiness generating buildings.

 

[King Flevance]

On my first post on CIV FANATICS (thread Welcome, New Member!, post #1535) I said that I still was not sure if I preferred CIV3 or CIV4. That question is now irrelevant because I am not planning to go back to CIV3. I’m addicted to some of the MODS for CIV4 now and do not want to give them up. Here is something to consider though, I never felt the need to use MODS for CIV3 and, therefore, I never did. On the other hand I don’t even consider going back to vanilla CIV4. I have to thank Firaxis for making a game that is so easy to mod, but especially all the modders that have gone to all the trouble so that we can play the game as it should be played.

Well, said. I too appreciate Firaxis for making the game easily moddable. I find it sad that I only have value in the product with a mod.

<snipped> One major difference between CIV4, and any other commercial game, and MODS though is that the first are supposed to be finished products made by professionals for money and the latter are always Works In Progress made by amateurs in their spare time for fun. What is acceptable in MODS is not acceptable in commercial games, like costumer support (modders almost always answer your questions, just check the threads) and fixes (modders almost always try to fix the bugs on their releases).

I agree. Once again the modding community has shown more support to the civ players than the company has. They were the ones trying to help people get their games running the first week of release too. While Firaxis said nothing in response - they didn't even have a support page to go to, instead they directed people here. Microsoft in my experience has shown better support than FIraxis has this time around.

Warlords &#8211; yes, I am going to buy it. I am looking forward to Vassal States and the Mongol Camp Unit. I tremble to think what the MOD community is going to do with it. That&#8217;s why I think my money will be well spent on Warlord.

PS: Just a stray thought, I wonder why Firaxis included religions on CIV4, I still don&#8217;t know what they bring to the game, except more culture / happiness generating buildings.

Religions seem pretty pointless to me too considering they didn't do anything with them regardless of the contraversial aspect. All they really do to gameplay is either make the AI be able to judge a relationship off a foolish thing. Along with make a player be able to support an economy off of it and not the actual economic aspects of the game.

 

[Commander Bello]

[...]
Religions seem pretty pointless to me too considering they didn't do anything with them regardless of the contraversial aspect. All they really do to gameplay is either make the AI be able to jusge a relationship off a foolish thing. Along with make a player be able to support an economy off of it and not the actual economic aspects of the game.

You've hit the nail on its head!
Religions give you some economic bonuses if you were the one to found them. Otherwise, they may allow for some minor adjustments as far as happiness is concerned, and they will introduce another diplomatic sub-element.
In short, that is what religions do in this game.

I won't argue over the fact that these limitations are necessary, based on the fact that real-world names have been used for the religions.

But, one may very well dispute whether using real-world names was the right decision.
If Firaxis would've gone for generic names like "Polytheism_1" and so on, we could have got the chance to decide to give that religion a name by ourselves (either to be chosen from a list or to be typed in manually), they could have got other features like establishing good relations between Religion_1 and Religion_2, whilst there would have been bad relations between Religion_2 and Religion_3. The one could have lead to better science and the other to improved culture, and so on.

Once again, a big chance was simply missed.

 

[Zombie69]

Facts are neither good nor bad, it's one's interpretation of the facts that is positive or negative. Thus your characterization of a thread containing criticism as a source of "objective truth" is (as you surely intended it to be) incorrect and quarrelsome.

I try to make the thread exactly as you stated and you still find something to complain about. If you were to type the exact first post, and i just copied your text, you'd still find a reason why it isn't ok for you.

Take a step back, and think OBJECTIVELY. Don't make your mind beforehand, and then try to find reasons why you're right. That's not how it works and you'll never arrive at anything constructive this way.

 

[troytheface]

think ur missing the point there..objectivity is a nice target to aim for however, it is impossible. Your viewpoint is that of a young male- of a certain economic and racial backdrop. ( whatever the specifics are) Your areas of concern are selected. (Even Einstein admitted that there are points that cannot be realized because of inherent subjectivity (perspective).

The over-use of the term "fanboy" is a perfect example. Lets see...a person who buys the game and thinks while its not perfect they enjoy it and other issues are not that big of a deal. How dare they. Maybe your correct,- how dare "Firaxis"
(just a name for people creating and marketing games and i assume trying to make a living to provide for themselves and those they care about) make imperfect things...much better to make nothing for no one and complain about things and to call other people a flip and non-original term (fanboy)-on a forum where people come to make suggestions and comments about something they like. (and people defend those things they care about? how absurd! foolish people.....to dense to see MY objectivity..to dumb to see things from MY definition/understanding and implementation of how to be "objective")

The "Loki" archetype- according to Jung- is in us all- and can provide useful thought at times-however, we are all prone to self delusion.
Ain't ragging on u there...but when every word and comment is dependant on the game/forum itself- this would create the ultimate "fanboy"

 

[DaviddesJ]

I try to make the thread exactly as you stated

Then you are extraordinarily inept, because you didn't even come close.

I'll give you a free tip: Starting off by insulting people isn't a good way to get them to do what you want. That's far from the only shortcoming of your approach, but it's certainly the most obvious.

 

[T.A JONES]

I understand the guy who' sick of the term Fanboy. The one's who deny any flaws in the Civ4 engine, holding steadfast the game was packaged and shipped flawless, or at least was patched to perfection after 1.61. Ether have extremely rare and humugously powerful specs, bad experience with Civ3 or a good incentive ( they think their part of the team)

I always see the same pattern here. Ganging up then, the guy who got pummeled the most, using its numbers as proof of being the voice of reason, therefor the correct opinion/position of the argument..
I see them lacking the real ammunition needed to defend from the truth and reality onslaught a few poster are capable of delivering. (Civ4 is flawed beyond excuse, in whatever area) A few of these valid remarks grouped together always attracts every type of smoke screen imaginable, including even the company line once in a while, which still falls flat against persuasive arguments publishing the blatant Take Two atrocities currently rotting away the Civ series legacy
Members who call it like they see it, Problems and all, will get responses to their posts that attempt to belittle or make them appear like senseless complainers, whiners, who's only real aim is to destroy the brotherhood of Civlovers!

I see them as truth conveyers, They present valid opinions and back up their claims in convincing fashion unfortunatly all the while, they are attracting more and more hatred from the latest thread following fanboys who are drawn in, like usual, to try an come to the rescue with tired old excuses, taunts or half truths at best, blanketed by those who can't stand hearing negative remarks however true they may be.
. When they see others with similar views having their weak arguments pummeled by truth (facts) that get laid down so eloquently it seems to infuriate them with every eyebrow raised, they come on so thick it really makes one think their sincerity and real intentions are nothing more then censorship. I mean you only have wait a few posts and Eventually out come the scare tactics, sorry flaming.. Usually that works to shut down the source of alter opinion.by closing the thread or tiring the OP and others who spoke out.

Only a few threads are being allowed as a direct line to voice improvements and obvious flaws in design and still they get bombarded with all types of members having a common chip on shoulders: people speaking out against Civ4 design. Others cry lets be friendly and share the love for Civ4 and immerse in enjoyable &#8220;What&#8217;s your favorite Civ-type discussions?" Hell I like to hit on some deeper issues once and a while like why my game is sucking so bad in any given department.

Is there a good reason why it&#8217;s stressed there&#8217;s no need for threads that could negatively effect sales Last I checked Fireaxis was never running this site as a modern form of advertising.

I&#8217;m not talking about them using internet publists and unconformed new age marketing experts who promote on all fan boards, under alliances or confirmed prior members.. Ya Competition is fierce and this place has clout. so The idea of mock members posting the company line on Civ Fan boards can't be ruled out by anyone, but. Its hard to sort them out with other fans who are constantly praising away and at the same time unscrupulously refuting well deserved, well though out and politely posed critism the entire time. Really the whole thing is quite embarrassing to this site's credibility.

I don't blame other members who share that not-so-perfect opinion of Civ4 for not speaking up. What&#8217;s the point? to see their opinion critised by a long ago set up brotherhood of Civ protecters who only post with lines like &#8220; stop playing the game if they don't like it&#8221;, or quit being a whiner then they watch as others resort to name calling when they stand up to their smoke laden arguments.
Some are concerned and venting their frustration,. Others are voicing their distaste on how they've been treated after years of customer loyalty. They abide by using designated threads for the purpose: to discuss with others who agree or disagree and others who offer some new recipes for improvement.

What&#8217;s happing instead?, their being called down quickly with senseless remarks from obsessed players whose goal is not making a more tasteful dish rather to defend a pile of gruel that&#8217;s been dumped on everyone&#8217;s plate. Its simple to say ' Its food Eat it!! Meaning its Civ be happy you got it and don't complain and: If you got something bad to say, stay away from the table(forum).
Members who like to share Potential ideas for a better game by offering critism on weak elements are even flat out told off!.
I wonder if some of these guys think Sid&#8217;s going to KNIGHT them on what? Slip them a compliment or a free copy for defending his game and killing bad publicity, that being exactly what serious complaints are if allowed to gather in large numbers, also that being what can potentially fuel change and improvements

My hat goes off to the ones who put up real discussions in meaningful threads against a backlash of embarrassing quotes. Thanks for not letting this forum be over run by one-sided Sid drones. Later

 

[hs1611]

T.A JONES, right on the spot.
By the way, if some people think the game is so perfect that any criticism is a sacrilege, why are they wasting so much of their time in this thread when they could be playing the "ultimate masterpiece"?
I am not saying they shouldn't post their opinions, I'm just curious.

 

[armchairknight]

Now don't hold back, T.A, tell us what you really think!

You speak of valid opinions, though in truth you're only speaking about those of a specific set of similarly held opinions. Everyone's opinions are, by definition, valid. Including yours.

Truth conveyers? Nice term, but is there only one truth here? Is there ever really only a single truth? Does that fly in our enlightened age that values diversity? Those that argue against your "truth conveyers" are hateful? I think not! Debate and argument are not evil or bad. What is this forum for if not spirited discussions by those who are interested in Civ?

You don't blame nay-sayers for not speaking up? What? Have you seen the post counts of those naysayers who do speak up? They're not shy, trust me.

Civ is simply not gruel for me, T.A, I don't worship Sid, Firaxis, or Commander Bello. Though, you never know, some might. Sid drone? Fanboy. Drone. Very unflattering terms, IMO, and not something that should be used in polite discussions. IMO, it shows a certain lack of respect and hints at a smug sense of superiority that I personally find unpleasant and unfathomable.

 

[DaviddesJ]

The one's who deny any flaws in the Civ4 engine, holding steadfast the game was packaged and shipped flawless, or at least was patched to perfection after 1.61.

But there's no such person. Everyone who has ever posted on CFC recognizes that Civ4 has flaws. The designers and developers all recognize that it has flaws. Everyone in this thread recognizes that it has flaws. The attempt to paint anyone who disagrees with you with these absurd mischaracterizations is exactly why there's so much annoyance at your postings (and those of your cohorts here).

 

[hclass]

But there's no such person. Everyone who has ever posted on CFC recognizes that Civ4 has flaws.

What about someone who has posted in CFC but not yet buying a copy of Civ4?

 

[Jazzster]

T.A. Jones has a point.

Already six month ago I was very surprised when I first got to this forum, by several posters who met every problem people shared -- in the sincere hope of getting them solved -- by repeating responses like: "You are wrong, you should stop whining, for my game runs perfectly."
To me that is a bit insane a statement, and I withdrew from discussing my own Civ IV-problems at this forum. I believe there where many who never came back to the game or the forum because of this unexpected, unintelligible and unfriendly reception by an internet community sharing a common interest.

 

[naterator]

Already six month ago I was very surprised when I first got to this forum, by several posters who met every problem people shared -- in the sincere hope of getting them solved -- by repeating responses like: "You are wrong, you should stop whining, for my game runs perfectly."
To me that is a bit insane a statement, and I withdrew from discussing my own Civ IV-problems at this forum. I believe there where many who never came back to the game or the forum because of this unexpected, unintelligible and unfriendly reception by an internet community sharing a common interest.

c'mon, this is a forum, not A public meeting place for open discussion, now, in the interest of creating an open dialouge, please sit silently and watch this movie.

 

[DaviddesJ]

Already six month ago I was very surprised when I first got to this forum, by several posters who met every problem people shared -- in the sincere hope of getting them solved -- by repeating responses like: "You are wrong, you should stop whining, for my game runs perfectly."

I've never seen anyone on CFC claim that the game must work perfectly for you because it works perfectly for them. Such a response obviously defies logic. I doubt you can demonstrate even a single example of that.

 

[Lars_Domus]

I've never seen anyone on CFC claim that the game must work perfectly for you because it works perfectly for them.

He didn't say that. He said they asked him to shut up on account of the game running perfectly for them.

 

[DaviddesJ]

He didn't say that. He said they asked him to shut up on account of the game running perfectly for them.

He made three assertions:

1. That they claimed he was "wrong" when he described the problems he was having.

2. That they said he should stop "whining" about the problems he was having.

3. That they justified points #1 and #2 by asserting that the game works perfectly for them.

I responded to his specific assertion #1.

 

[Lars_Domus]

1. That they claimed he was "wrong" when he described the problems he was having.

I've seen some of the kinds of replies he's describing and they mostly claim that the problems are due to outdated computers, even when the computer in question exceeds the recommended specs. Also, I often see people who are having problems being told to "just return the game to the store," despite the fact that stores will not take back opened software in many or most countries. These two types of responses are more than often concluded with "shut up."

But no, I cannot specificly remember anyone claiming that because Civ IV ran perfect on their computer, it must run perfectly for everyone.

Edit: That's not to say I agree with Jazzster that these are the only replies you get. For every "shut up and buy a new computer" I've seen at least a couple of constructive suggestions.

 

[Commander Bello]

http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=3272434&postcount=13
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=3277215&postcount=28
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=3282166&postcount=52

just some of the typical answers one got when daring to criticize the game.