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

[Truronian]

Like i said, it has nothing to do with value. Whether i paid $2 or $2,000 for the game makes no difference at all. The fact is that i bought a game, expecting it to work without bugs, and that's not what they delivered. You can't sell defective products to your customers, refuse to fix the products, and expect those customers to buy from you again. At least, not if i'm the customer in question. It's a matter of principle.

You can't expect them to get every single bug in the game. Civ4 is one of the least buggy games I've played (after 1.61). I'd hardly call Civ4 defective. Seems to me you just have too high standards.

 

[Zombie69]

Maybe my standards are too high because i'm used to a company that actually fixes their bugs (called Blizzard).

 

[bfordyce]

Like i said, it has nothing to do with value. Whether i paid $2 or $2,000 for the game makes no difference at all. The fact is that i bought a game, expecting it to work without bugs, and that's not what they delivered. You can't sell defective products to your customers, refuse to fix the products, and expect those customers to buy from you again. At least, not if i'm the customer in question. It's a matter of principle.

Ok, I guess we have a difference of opinion. I was mad when it didn't work, but I think the 1.61 patch fixed the major problems I had. Of course it could always be better.

There's always a tradeoff in a software project, one never has enough time or $$ to make it perfect. It could always use improvement.

Civ III had a bug where if you captured two many cities it would crash. I never got a domination victory because of that (would always crash). Still, I enjoyed the game enough to not feel ripped off.

I guess my main point is that you've had a lot of fun with this game. Why refuse to buy anything else from Fixaris out of principle? You're only hurting yourself. The $30 that Fixaris loses from you isn't going to make a difference or excert any pressure on them, but you might miss out on some fun.

I'm not too pumped about Warlords either, I'm going to wait for reviews, but maybe there'll be some AI tweaks in this or a future expansion that will make the game even more enjoyable. I'm going forward with an open mind.

 

[Truronian]

Maybe my standards are too high because i'm used to a company that actually fixes their bugs (called Blizzard).

They have fixed them though. I cannot name one major bug left in the game (although I realise that bugs are more aparant when you micromanage heavily). Just seems your reason for not buying Warlords are the bugs that it will more than likely fix...

 

[naterator]

For example, I don't think I'd want an AI so aggressive that they send out their starting warrior to try to steal my worker.

oh my god! i'd kill for the AI to pull a crazy move like that! maybe it's just me...

They have fixed them though. I cannot name one major bug left in the game

am i the only one who has more problems with 1.61 than 1.52? the game runs fine for me, but on global view and the minimap, there's floating swaths of blackness that move slowly over the ages. sometimes they're there, sometimes they're not. that's really the only problem, but 1.52 fixed any problems i was having, and my video card is below spec, so i was expecting more lingering effects, but on low graphics, it worked fine on 1.52, now it works fine except above.

 

[LordKestrel]

Maybe my standards are too high because i'm used to a company that actually fixes their bugs (called Blizzard).

You never played Diablo2, did you? While they fix most bugs in their games, that game they let sit with some severe bugs for years. Then they released a patch, fixing some bugs, ignoring some, and adding others. While Blizzard is typically good, they are far from perfect.

 

[King Flevance]

I guess my main point is that you've had a lot of fun with this game. Why refuse to buy anything else from Fixaris out of principle? You're only hurting yourself. The $30 that Fixaris loses from you isn't going to make a difference or excert any pressure on them, but you might miss out on some fun.

I'm not too pumped about Warlords either, I'm going to wait for reviews, but maybe there'll be some AI tweaks in this or a future expansion that will make the game even more enjoyable. I'm going forward with an open mind.

Make that $60 bucks because I don't plan on buying it either. It tallies, enough people do make a statement. I went into Civ 4 on release with an open mind and got b*tch slapped for doing so. I won't be doing that again.

They have fixed them though. I cannot name one major bug left in the game (although I realise that bugs are more aparant when you micromanage heavily). Just seems your reason for not buying Warlords are the bugs that it will more than likely fix...

I assure you some people are still catching major bugs and definatley exploits. The bold statement is Zombie's point. An expansion is for adding things to a game, not fixing one. It is having people pay for a patch. I am from Missouri. While I appreciate the comments by Dennis Shirk earlier, I am going to have to see before I believe.

@naterator: I agree with you on both of those points. You aren't the only one. The problem is the AI is too stupid to know that strategy though atm. Also, I too have those same issues.

You never played Diablo2, did you? While they fix most bugs in their games, that game they let sit with some severe bugs for years. Then they released a patch, fixing some bugs, ignoring some, and adding others. While Blizzard is typically good, they are far from perfect.

I have many moons of play hours under Diablo2- online and offline. What bugs are you talking about? If you mean the multiplayer hacking items and stuff, those are player bugs. People do that same stuff with Civ. A company can't be blamed because cheaters play their game.

 

[Harrier]

I thought that 1.61 was "the last patch for Civ4". Are you saying that it's only "the last patch for Civ4 until after the expansion comes out" (and then there will be some backpatching of Civ4 w/o Warlords)?

I thought the same thing.

Maybe thet decided to release a small Civ4 patch containing things they had to get right for Warlords.

Or again it may be a Civ4 patch only available if you buy Warlords.

 

[Leif]

Dshirk, I don't know if this question has been asked already, but will the great wall be visible from outer space?
Also, can you shead any light on the viking scenario, for example, the traits of Ragnar, the settings available, etc.

 

[D. Minky]

Hmmm, interesting conundrum for firaxis. They attempted to increase modability so the game seems more user-friendly and more worth buying yet this seems to be back-firing somewhat as people ask what's the point in lining Firaxis CEO's pockets by buying the expansion pack when plenty of people are willing to provide stunning mods (Sevomod, downloaded it recently- fantastic) for the mere love of the game.

Interesting concept, well it is to me anyway as I've contemplated simply not buying the expansion pack, having said that I probably will, y'know to keep the free market system ticking along

I think the New Stuff that Warlords will add is absolutely worth paying for. The work that the modding community has done is fantastic, but as far as adding completely new rules, the ones who designed the game can do it much better. A lot of mods have New Stuff that is a very creative manipulation of the original rules -- for example, the spells in FfH, brilliant! But who among the modders would have been able to create the Vassal State option, or the Great Wall that surrounds your cultural radius and keeps barbarians out? Or the just-revealed ability to allow the AI to play X number of turns before you join the game (no more Stone-Age Americans anyone? ). I love the stuff the modders have done, but the stuff that the pro developers can do is a unique addition to this game. I trust the modders to come up with great new civics, civilizations, and units... but its this amazing new rule goodies that we can only rely on paid expansions for.

I can't wait for Warlords!

 

[Colossian]

As I've known, Mod doesnt work in MP.

 

[LvCoder]

Well hopefully it will breath some life back into the game, I couldn’t agree more with the previous poster who said 4 was boring. In addition to being boring the loss of the editor, the biggest single loss in this version, making religion so prominent hence adding a whole new layer of pretty much useless kaka to the version sent me back to 3.

The graphics aren’t as snappy, I got to keep droves of workers around to clean up the pollution, corruption sucks, but there are tons of units ( most I have customized ) and I can set the governor to deal with the cities and play.

I personally like civ for the war part of the game but 4 has made that boring. If modern armor could float that’s all you would need.

In addition to navel and air units being pretty much useless artillery units are equally as useless in 4 with no range attack and no ability to bomb troops. Artillery is a ranged weapon, and battleships don’t park on the shore to fire.

I will buy the upgrade and hope it adds enough life back into the game to make the original purchase of 4 a worth wile investment. I have played civ since it started and this is the first version that I have disliked. All had there ups and downs but this one, in my case had enough downs to make me decide to go back to 3.

To much management, very light on the units and the units that are there are borderline useless in many cases.

On the upside unit promotions are an outstanding addition, as are the graphics, its pretty, but if its dull who cares.

 

[Commander Bello]

Sorry guys, but I don't get what some of you are trying to say... If you don't want to buy the expansion just plain don't, you don't have to spoil it for others who are anxiously awaiting it.[...]

This, I think, is a very important statement.

I think here the typical attitude of a fan / supporter / fanboy, whatever expression you like more, is shown. "Don't tell me anything bad about the game I love so much! Don't you even dare to try!"

One may have different opinions about the game. The one is more critical, the other one less.

But at the end it always seem to be the above mentioned group who whine and blame the others for "spoiling fun". Honestly, wouldn't it much better to realistically discuss the errors and bugs which are still to be found?
In the end it are those supporters denying the errors who at least do not contribute to better patching.

 

[King Flevance]

Some people see criticism as merely picking at something though. These people believe "absolute goods" and "absolute evils" not only exist but everything falls in to one of these catagories. A sort of black and white view of the world. It is "impossible" to be a fan of a game and criticise it at the same time to them.

On the first page of this post:

...and Shigga claims to be a 100 percent Civ IV addict...

Because a REAL addict will buy anything with the name of Civ on it regardless if it is a good product or just a piece of crap with the title upon it. If the title is on it, don't ask questions, just buy and support it.

Because Shigga has started a thread about the possibility that he sees no point in buying the expansion yet, he is no longer a fan. He is a undercover coorperate spy of Blizzard sent these forums to destroy a community of Firaxis fans... or something.

We all speak nonsense about the problems with the game and we are trying to kill it with our discussions of broken features rather than bring them into the light to suggest where the game can be expanded on. Or point out the areas Firaxis should focus on to better themselves as well as the game. Called feedback.

 

[Sisonpyh]

Maybe my standards are too high because i'm used to a company that actually fixes their bugs (called Blizzard).

This is hilarious. There were countless number of bugs that were rampant in their WoW alpha/beta that remained in the game until about 1 and 1/2 years after release.

 

[AvianAvenger]

Originally Posted by Zombie69
Maybe my standards are too high because i'm used to a company that actually fixes their bugs (called Blizzard).

Thats got to be the funniest thing ive ever heard. Just how many years did they need to bring out that 1.10 patch (daiblo 2) eh? Better late than never right?

 

[Shigga]

Because Shigga has started a thread about the possibility that he sees no point in buying the expansion yet, he is no longer a fan. He is a undercover coorperate spy of Blizzard sent these forums to destroy a community of Firaxis fans... or something.

Crap now my cover's blown!

Like I stated before, I'm still a fan of the franchise. But, being a fan is very similar to being a valuable friend: Real friendship is not about about love, peace and happiness all the time. It's about caring for the other and that means to also talk about things that can be uncomfortable and get them off the table.
It's the same with being a valuable fan, imho.

I can live with the fact that WL focuses on the scenario buffs. I hope the next will add tons of stuff for the non-scenario-players.

If I will buy WL bc the mods will go for the new SDK features, I'm not decided yet.

It's not like I don't value the effort per se that Firaxis makes, but rather the scope. They got a whole team of pro's (like others stated b4) dedicated to WL, so I wonder how much more they could possibly achieve.

 

[Sohan]

Well said Shigga.

Anywho, I really really want vassal states. And those scenarios.

 

[Zombie69]

Thats got to be the funniest thing ive ever heard. Just how many years did they need to bring out that 1.10 patch (daiblo 2) eh? Better late than never right?

How many years will it take Firaxis to fix all their bugs? It's a trick question. The answer is that they never will. The fact that Blizzard is providing patches years after a game came out shows how dedicated they are to customer support.

 

[midn8t]

You never played Diablo2, did you? While they fix most bugs in their games, that game they let sit with some severe bugs for years. Then they released a patch, fixing some bugs, ignoring some, and adding others. While Blizzard is typically good, they are far from perfect.

diablo 2 was play able out of the box civ 4 was not, at least it wasnt for me.

had issues with my windows 64

I havent really ran across any bugs senes they got it all patched up i half to say its really enjoyable game now.
I dont think more game companys should do open beta testing tho