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

[troytheface]

a certain irony- (being of proponent of the idea that everyone is (or can be )an artist (Joseph Beuys) in that i agree with the above post. I am suspicious of mods in that i think they unconciously favor the modder.

(and the arguement that - no no they are tested ect. does not fly in my mind because the tests themselves would be biased - and even others that test them are of a minority- friends or like thinkers-)

Whereas good ol capitalism favors just tho who buy the product-the detachment to the commercial audience is greater.
This is not to say that the programmers are better- just that the bias is less.

I would think that mods would be of a personal nature and as such the better ones are probably not shared- (again a bit of irony)

A modder that is proud and earnest working for a real cool result that is geared towards having their mod used (which seems to be the case as i see
links and downloads given/advertised)- is in it not for profit.....not for personal vision, but for.....what? the milk of human kindness in sharing?
possible- but doubtful. (in my mind)
People at times take something "good" and then try to make it "great". I suggest "good" is enough.

 

[King Flevance]

Troytheface, I think alot of regular players of civ regard mods in the same way you do. In that they are kind of like cheating to make the game fit the player more and tilt the scales to the player. That's cool, more power to you, I was the same way on alot of games before civ 4. I never ran a mod on 3 and never wanted to.
One thing I have noticed though is that I have seen people drop ideas from a mod because it will not be supported by the AI. Or in other words the AI is too stupid to use it. Some don't drop these things, so it is important to read the information on the mod. I personally have yet to alter anything but graphics so far although I admit I plan on doing so. I will be someone that would drop something if the AI doesn't know how to use it. Ok having said that:

(and the arguement that - no no they are tested ect. does not fly in my mind because the tests themselves would be biased - and even others that test them are of a minority- friends or like thinkers-)

I see nothing wrong in viewing things this way for anyone. Having paid for your copy of the game entitles anyone to use it in the way they see fit. But I would see if you could acknowledge this as imprisoning yourself from a better gaming experience by second guessing the intentions behind a particular mod.

good ol capitalism

Can you use those words together in a sentence like that? lol j/k.

This is not to say that the programmers are better- just that the bias is less.

This might be true. However, because of the fact that they are afraid of losing sales on specific areas. (For an example religious diferences in the game) we have lost a possibility of flavor. A mod that only allows religions to have a distinct trait only to them gives the game more flavor and no bias neccessarily. It depends on who gets what religion in the games played using the mod.

A modder that is proud and earnest working for a real cool result that is geared towards having their mod used (which seems to be the case as i see
links and downloads given/advertised)- is in it not for profit.....not for personal vision, but for.....what? the milk of human kindness in sharing?
possible- but doubtful. (in my mind) People at times take something "good" and then try to make it "great". I suggest "good" is enough.

As to this last part, once again, everyone is entitled to their opinion. I notice that there is a large amount of programmers that play civ and mod it in their spare time. Why? is a good question. I believe it to be because they are fans of the game and are in a community of other fans. The ability to make a mod of a game that achieves good status among a community centered around a game put on a pedestal is probably a good honor for them. Kind of like a car club.
Car clubs take a car and customize it not to factory standards always but for the car enthusiast. They take something they love and turn it into something they can love even more. It is sort of human nature. You can be proud to own a '69 Shelby Mustang. But not as proud as someone who has a personalized '69 Shelby Mustang to be everything they wanted it to be.

But personally, I do believe it is out of the ability to share what they have done with others. It takes alot of time to mod and having someone tell you it is a great mod is a good feeling. However, one day, when I finish my mod I will be waiting for the first problem to arise as I suspect many modders out there do. Then you have to personally weigh the options of what to do with the problem.

 

[Armorydave]

Troytheface, I think alot of regular players of civ regard mods in the same way you do. In that they are kind of like cheating to make the game fit the player more and tilt the scales to the player. That's cool, more power to you, I was the same way on alot of games before civ 4. I never ran a mod on 3 and never wanted to.

One thing I have noticed though is that I have seen people drop ideas from a mod because it will not be supported by the AI. Or in other words the AI is too stupid to use it. Some don't drop these things, so it is important to read the information on the mod.

That is why I steer clear of mods, AI limitations. When the AI is the weak spot of a game adding unanticipated game features seems destined to benefit players. I already have to give the AI a pretty steep handicap (Monarch), I really don't want to ratchet it up any more.

That is why I find official expansions so attractive. I expect to be tiring of the vanilla game (I still have some scenarios to play and am getting into small worlds for the first time) when Warlords releases. If it extends my play time a couple more months (I expect more) $30 is a trivial expense given the entertainment I get out of Civ.

As for the modding crowd, they will all buy it to stay up with the current trends. That means *most* people in the OP's position will probably end up buying it regardless of their current statements.

And no Flevance I really don't think you are a whiner. I agree with some of what you say, disagree with some as well, but you always explain yourself well with a minimum of condesension and definitive pronouncements about subjective issues. The comment was really directed at the other poster as he is clearly of the opinion that people who generally enjoy the game are mindless sycophants or company stooges; attacking even simple observations like, "the game works fine for me". You were collateral damage because of your posts in the same vicinity and me initially mistaking you for someone else, my apologies.

 

[troytheface]

i kinda liked ol King's 'tude meself and got a chuckle outta the capitalism quip.

The limiting one's imagination comment is hard to dismiss-(i have a theory that most malovolent behavior is based in a lack of imagination)

I also like the car club analogy- they and gamers have alot of fun with their
toys- however i would say that a mint condition 1946 whatever that u put ur cup holder in- would be more valuable than a modified 1946 whatever with added super scoops and gold hubcaps. While both have an audience - the
mint condition (unmodded) version tends to stand the test of time better(and are in museums) for most. (and would to me)
(which is to say that maybe using another's mod does not add possibilities but rather closes them....)

 

[Sahkuhnder]

That is why I steer clear of mods, AI limitations. When the AI is the weak spot of a game adding unanticipated game features seems destined to benefit players. I already have to give the AI a pretty steep handicap (Monarch), I really don't want to ratchet it up any more.

Try Emperor, once the AI smacks you around a bit you may not be so sympathetic.

I agree with your point but that need not prevent you from using all mods. Many very good mods only make slight adjustments to the numbers and balance things out for all players or are graphical based and only change how units show up or add new information to the screens that make gameplay easier to manage.

I will get the expansion as soon as I can, but still very much appreciate the effort that went into all of the 'unofficial' mods that are out there.

If adding something to the game makes it more fun for you, isn't that really what it's all about in the first place.

 

[Commander Bello]

[...]The comment was really directed at the other poster as he is clearly of the opinion that people who generally enjoy the game are mindless sycophants or company stooges; attacking even simple observations like, "the game works fine for me".[...]

Assuming that you were adressing me with the above quotation I can only state that you obviously haven't read my postings.

I think I have made it clear that I don't have any problems with anybody who claims to like the game. Yet, if such people continue with statements about "no technical issues", "perfect game" and so on, we enter the stage of lies or at least of completely unreflected claims.

I remember very well, when I entered this forum in mid of 2003 and read a lot of things about PTW and C3C which was yet to come at this time. Many supporters claimed unproven things which were just plain wrong. When C3C finally came out, we had the same thing as we have today - C3C was praised as being an ultimative piece of software, without any fault.

And I think that even today people are entering this forum to look for some information about Civ4. I don't want to leave them alone with some amateurs' commercial statements for the company.
Civ4 has its faults, and if we as an active community do not mention and discuss those, they won't get fixed. Maybe, they won't get fixed anyway, yet anyone new to the game should at least know and get some information that all those bold statements which you may read at other spots are not completely true.

If you like the game, it is fine with me. If you like the game, although you know that there are some issues, you have based your liking on this knowledge. Yet, if you are going to tell us that the game has no issues then your are either a liar, or you don't pay much attention to the game.
In any case, then you shouldn't be the only person someone new here has to listen to.

[edit]: One thing about the fanboys. It becomes very obvious that this group of fans is more concerned about the fact that others dare to do some criticism, than being concerned about the fact that there might be something to criticise. And this is something, I really feel to be strange... It is the messenger, who get's bashed, not the message itself. Ever thought about that?

 

[King Flevance]

I still like you Commander.

There is truth in your posts concerning issues you bring up. I too have many faults with the release of this game and will sometimes wing-man you. I personally just dont have the patience nor the fervor anymore to take on huge debates of it all at once. As you probably know yourself it can get petty and rediculously off track quite easily like stepping on a messageboard land mine.

But you sir, drop bombs. Like the 2 I previously quoted and:

And I think that even today people are entering this forum to look for some information about Civ4. I don't want to leave them alone with some amateurs' commercial statements for the company.
Civ4 has its faults, and if we as an active community do not mention and discuss those, they won't get fixed. Maybe, they won't get fixed anyway, yet anyone new to the game should at least know and get some information that all those bold statements which you may read at other spots are not completely true.

I agree with this as if you haven't yet bought the game. (Did not buy on release.) It would be wise to do research before your purchase. Coming here may help you know about the game and any issues concerning it. I found Civ 3's late game fun to play but I find 4's boring and drawn out by lack of "interesting things" happening. Like AI turtling up and the fact that I find the diplomatic victory broken as you have to destroy half the world to be a diplomat. The AI doesn't seem to know how to use modern units that well in general, not just bombers. Then going into espionage and air missions are a joke by themselves. This is not something I expected to happen personally due to what I had seen from 3 titles before this release.

[edit]: One thing about the fanboys. It becomes very obvious that this group of fans is more concerned about the fact that others dare to do some criticism, than being concerned about the fact that there might be something to criticise. And this is something, I really feel to be strange... It is the messenger, who get's bashed, not the message itself. Ever thought about that?

I have already stated that I think some people are too excited over the idea of a Civ 4 existing to be able to tell that they were robbed/lied to. Many features that were said to be 'improved' or 'modified/removed' are not only present but as broken as they were in previous versions.

EDIT: Sometimes when outnumbered on a topic of the game's quality it easy to be outnumbered by "fanboys" calling your statements false with no proof, that you lose your patience. Especially, if you have provided proof that your statements are true. This leads to a heightened defensive stance which if your not careful can be your downfall as people use the tactic of attacking your demeanor for justification over the subject in question itself.

 

[DaviddesJ]

I agree, the expansion is worthless, and i don't plan on getting it. Just my $0.02.

You don't want to buy it, and that's certainly up to you. But you've complained about certain flaws in the game, and some of those will be fixed in the expansion. So that makes it not worthless.

 

[Zombie69]

That makes it less than worthless. That makes it something that one shouldn't buy on principle, because one shouldn't encourage a company that refuses to even fix the products it sells. The game should be fixed with patches that don't require an expansion. Selling something that doesn't work, and then charging extra to fix it, is illegal in anything but the videogame industry, and it's about time governments intervene and force companies to respect their customers and provide products that actually do what they're claimed to do.

 

[King Flevance]

That makes it less than worthless. That makes it something that one shouldn't buy on principle, because one shouldn't encourage a company that refuses to even fix the products it sells. The game should be fixed with patches that don't require an expansion. Selling something that doesn't work, and then charging extra to fix it, is illegal in anything but the videogame industry, and it's about time governments intervene and force companies to respect their customers and provide products that actually do what they're claimed to do.

On the money right here.

 

[Gr3yL3gion]

Didn't read all the post, my only two cents is that first expansion normally sucks(Civ3 PTW), skip it and buy the second expansion, if any.

Otherwise only buy it after patches is released to correct inevitable bugs, or when the price drops further.

 

[glokkonn]

To me I will be buying the expansion when it comes out.
Compared to perfection Firaxis really blows.
Compared to other companies in the real world Firaxis stands up pretty well.

I am only up to Noble level, so I am far from being an accomplished player. But it seems to me that Civ IV is more of a puzzle than a game. The solution is:

Expand as fast as possible, chopping and whipping out units as to maximize production speeds. Expand towards enemy civs as fast as possible. Build stacks of units to conquer enemies until you run out of units to continue fighting or until maintaince costs get too high. Get peace, consolidate, go into builder mode, then when the next big military advance is learned repeat and conquer whatever civ is now next to your borders. Repeat process until the end of the game.

Until you are at least 2x the size of civ number 2 you can't win peaceful victories fast enough. Once you are this big it seems kind of silly to not just conquer whoever is left.

So it *seems* (again I am still somewhat a novice at this game) that from a pure gaming standpoint Firaxis has created a puzzle more than a game.

On the other hand for $30 plus now another $30 I have gotten many many hours of fun entertainment. This is a lot more entertainment than what I would have gotten out of 4 movies - ok 8 movies now with the expansion. Plus I shelled out another $30 (now 60 with the expansion) because my wife and I play together LAN style, us against the remaining civs, and so now not only is she entertained as well but civ IV is also strengthening our marriage.

So to me, civ IV is more than worth the price of admission. Civ IV is a nice puzzle that seems to have a single solution, but the process of solving this puzzle and keeping up with all of the pieces of this puzzle is a most enjoyable and delightful way to spend my free time.

 

[Zombie69]

To me I will be buying the expansion when it comes out.
Compared to perfection Firaxis really blows.
Compared to other companies in the real world Firaxis stands up pretty well.

How about compared to Blizzard? I mean, as far as i'm concerned, they're a company in the real world that has such good customer support, perfection would be a step down for them.

For one thing, Blizzard provides a free multiplayer server for all their customers, with no monthly fee, for as long as they own the game. As for patches...

They released a patch for Starcraft a few weeks ago. Like all their patches, it comes in two formats, one for the original game and one for the expansion. Last year (i.e. in 2005), they released no less than 7 patches for Starcraft for the PC, and 8 for the Mac. Remember, Starcraft was published in 1998. They're producing patches for a (pretty much by now) flawless 8 year old game at a faster rate than Firaxis produce them for an 8 month old game still full of bugs.

Here's a list of some of the patches Blizzard have released for the vanilla game alone, for the PC. There's even more for the Mac. And i'm not even talking about patches for the expansion for the PC and for the Mac.

Remember, this is an 8 year old game, still supported with patches. Remember, Firaxis have decided that only a few months after the game came out, and despite the fact it's still full of bugs, they will not release any more patch for it. To obtain further patches, you'll have to buy the expansion. With an attitude like that, there's no way i'll buy anything from them ever again, including the expansion.

 

[Shigga]

The game should be fixed with patches that don't require an expansion. Selling something that doesn't work, and then charging extra to fix it, is illegal in anything but the videogame industry, and it's about time governments intervene and force companies to respect their customers and provide products that actually do what they're claimed to do.

Amen to that!

I hope to see a lot more noticable effects for the normal player with the core project in the near future. Show Firaxis how the job should be done!

 

[glokkonn]

This is in response to Zombie's last post about Blizzard.

I always wondered why WOW now has about 10 times the subscriber base as compared to DAOC,Everquest, and other such games. Now I know why.

If you leave Civ IV, I will miss your commentary. Although I do not micro manage as voraciously and perfectly as you do, my civs do much better now that I have implemented many of your techniques. Thank you for figuring this all out, and especially thank you for describing it in a way I could understand and apply to my own games.

I do not intend to stop playing Civ IV for quite a while. However, based upon your recommendation I will most certainly be checking out Blizzard games as the next game I play. On the other hand it could be quite some time before I switch games, especially since my wife is getting hooked on Civ IV and that makes for some good times ahead of me... errrrr us

 

[Truronian]

Zombie69, if the games so broken, then why didn't you take it back for a refund?

 

[King Flevance]

How about compared to Blizzard? I mean, as far as i'm concerned, they're a company in the real world that has such good customer support, perfection would be a step down for them.

For one thing, Blizzard provides a free multiplayer server for all their customers, with no monthly fee, for as long as they own the game. As for patches...

They released a patch for Starcraft a few weeks ago. Like all their patches, it comes in two formats, one for the original game and one for the expansion. Last year (i.e. in 2005), they released no less than 7 patches for Starcraft for the PC, and 8 for the Mac. Remember, Starcraft was published in 1998. They're producing patches for a (pretty much by now) flawless 8 year old game at a faster rate than Firaxis produce them for an 8 month old game still full of bugs.

Here's a list of some of the patches Blizzard have released for the vanilla game alone, for the PC. There's even more for the Mac. And i'm not even talking about patches for the expansion for the PC and for the Mac.

Remember, this is an 8 year old game, still supported with patches. Remember, Firaxis have decided that only a few months after the game came out, and despite the fact it's still full of bugs, they will not release any more patch for it. To obtain further patches, you'll have to buy the expansion. With an attitude like that, there's no way i'll buy anything from them ever again, including the expansion.

I have to quote you again Zombie on another well made point. This is an arguement I have seen raised many times on here and the people supporing Firaxis can only respond with "Oh yeah well, the support for WoW sucks so Blizzard does too." I would like to have Firaxis try and make an MMORPG out of Civ so people can see exactly how fast they would fall on their faces with poor support like this on a product such as Civ 4.

I am waiting to see what all actually is included in the expansion pack so I can pull up a dead thread and compare what firaxis actually threw in based off of what people voted for. Or claimed they did in an earlier poll made by a user here on the board the night of the votings. That will be interesting.

 

[Shigga]

They released a patch for Starcraft a few weeks ago. Like all their patches, it comes in two formats, one for the original game and one for the expansion. Last year (i.e. in 2005), they released no less than 7 patches for Starcraft for the PC, and 8 for the Mac. Remember, Starcraft was published in 1998. They're producing patches for a (pretty much by now) flawless 8 year old game at a faster rate than Firaxis produce them for an 8 month old game still full of bugs.

You are right in saying that Blizzard is a bright example in how to do patch policy. When Warcraft hit the market they had a task force that did nothing but browse the community forums on the lookout for really bad glitches and bugs and trying to assemble a patch to adress them asap.

Of course, they still patch Starcraft bc it is still hugely popular in Asia where it is played competitively and the market for eSports is huge. Serious quality commitment assures an ongoing placement in the major leagues. This adds a different quality of financial interest.

Still, Firaxis could use more than a leaf out of Blizzards book, even if they do not have the financial resources that Blizzard has. The Civ franchise will never be as competitive as RTS games bc of the turn based structure and the very long duration of an average game. But- they got a huge fanbase that even today plays civ 1. Still, they listen only in small parts to us. Imho, Blizzard earns TONS and TONS of money bc they always stayed close to the fanbase and never relaxed in their commitment for quality.

EDIT: And those who complain about the 'lack of quality' with WoW: What they did with WoW has never ever been done on such a huge scale b4. I think with WoW it was the same as with the Harry Potter franchise, they just did not expect such a huge success in such short time so the logistics were not adequate. Try to set up a MMORPG with so many players, every one with a different hardware, and so many servers to manage, and you will see that quality management on such a huge scale is more than extremely difficult.

 

[Zombie69]

Because as you know, the company wouldn't take it back once it's been opened. Another way for game companies to work around the legal system.

To glokkonn : i said i wouldn't buy anymore of their products, i didn't say i'd stop playing Civ 4. I hope the community will be able to fix what Firaxis didn't bother to, and in the meantime i'll keep playing what i've got. But i most certainly won't play Warlords, or any other expansion. And if Civ 5 ever comes out and is produced by the same company, i most certainly won't buy it.

 

[midn8t]

Thirty bucks is much less than I spend for gas a week, so buying is a no-brainer. One thing to consider is that future mods will likely only work with Warlords.

dont get us started on gase prices sigh