NikNak
Warlord
Wow. I leave this site for a couple of weeks and everything goes crazy! I have to remember to do my 1 hour of surfing a day at work. 
Where'd the 3.13 change list thread go?
- Thread starter bovinespy
- Start date
- Status
azzaman333
meh
He took the time to reply at Apolyton, why not here? Because people are annoyed that the patch he implied would be out isn't out and they want some communication from Firaxis?
2 minutes to post that there has been a delay, and they'll release it as soon as possible would've been great! Instead, all alexman has done is flame me and post that he is just a fan with inside info. Well if he has that info, why not share it and stop us complaining!
r_rolo1
King of myself
@ Arlborn
First, I know that is nothing personal ( even now I wrote a post about our commom "sort of" SG about your future actions ) .
Second, I understand that alexman became p*ssed with the sputidity atractor that his thread became more to the end ( when the valuable ideas dried out ) and with all the circus that surrounded this patch ( slightly off-topic: I'm here in this forums as a member a year and some months and as a lurker for some more time ( I remember Charis and Sullla original "Cuban isolacionists" ... ) and I can't remember a single x-pack or patch that made so much ( good and bad ) fuzz as BtS in all his shapes and patterns ( since Boudica's... errr...LH to" Why do we have two germanies and three romes in BtS? " ). Someone could explain me what is happenning here?
). I'm just stated that, if I were in alexman's shoes , I would had acted differently ( something like " go to h*ll !!! " and let the thread to sink over his weight... )
First, I know that is nothing personal ( even now I wrote a post about our commom "sort of" SG about your future actions ) .
Second, I understand that alexman became p*ssed with the sputidity atractor that his thread became more to the end ( when the valuable ideas dried out ) and with all the circus that surrounded this patch ( slightly off-topic: I'm here in this forums as a member a year and some months and as a lurker for some more time ( I remember Charis and Sullla original "Cuban isolacionists" ... ) and I can't remember a single x-pack or patch that made so much ( good and bad ) fuzz as BtS in all his shapes and patterns ( since Boudica's... errr...LH to" Why do we have two germanies and three romes in BtS? " ). Someone could explain me what is happenning here?
). I'm just stated that, if I were in alexman's shoes , I would had acted differently ( something like " go to h*ll !!! " and let the thread to sink over his weight... )
Moderator Action: Discussion of Firaxis/Take2 policies is certainly allowed here (with the notable exception of copy protection schemes). But, flaming of Alexman isn't any more legal than flaming of any other CivFanatics member, and if you can't distinguish the two, we'll close this thread too and assign infractions as warranted.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Actually, he said he gave us the change log as thanks for the bug reports and save games we gave him at his request that helped them in quashing bugs. Removing the list seems to imply that he no longer appreciates the help of those posting in the bugs forum here. Staying quiet on the matter just lends truth to our opinions whether valid or not.
He said... He meant something different... People put words in his mouth.. Pot... Kettle... Black...
Firaxian apologists behaved no better than those pointing out their ineptitude.
MarkM
Cow Herder
Yes, this seems to be the case, it had created anew issue that was found late in testing & they had to go back and fix it.
And then much wailing ensued elsewhere in the cosmos....
Hyronymus
Troop leader
- Joined
- Nov 25, 2003
- Messages
- 1,869
Finally something sensible comes along. Sadly, it was preceeded by some wishful (naieve) reasoning:
I cannot find Alexman's contract, requiring him to inform us on anything. What he did was nice, initially, but turned a bit sour in the end. Nonetheless, getting angry with people will not enhance the development of any patch.
Gaius Octavius
Deity
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2006
- Messages
- 4,016
Maybe because Apolyton (OT excepted) is free of much of the immature flaming and complaining that goes on so frequently in the Civ 4 forums here?
entwood
Warlord
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2007
- Messages
- 187
So the current Apolyton banner is still correct then?
BTS PATCH COMING SOON!
(29 September 2007, 12:03 | Civ4 | 93 comments) Alex "Alexman" Mantzaris, lead programmer on Civilization: Beyond the Sword, has informed us that the upcoming patch for Civilization: Beyond the Sword will be out in early October (1st or 2nd). The latest delay involved fixing the "Lock Modified Assets" ("*MOD*") difficulties with Steam or Civ4 Complete versions. You can read his full post here. - snoopy369
BTS PATCH COMING SOON!
(29 September 2007, 12:03 | Civ4 | 93 comments) Alex "Alexman" Mantzaris, lead programmer on Civilization: Beyond the Sword, has informed us that the upcoming patch for Civilization: Beyond the Sword will be out in early October (1st or 2nd). The latest delay involved fixing the "Lock Modified Assets" ("*MOD*") difficulties with Steam or Civ4 Complete versions. You can read his full post here. - snoopy369
Lobsang1979
Chieftain
Hmmm, as a somewhat contibutor to the previous thread's debate I am beginning to see a familiar pattern emerging in the tone of this one... 
Much of the flaming in the previous thread seemed to stem from a 'tit for tat' attitude that some posters adopted (inc. myself at times), usually characterised by long posts with many separate quotes accompanied by rebuttals. Before a similar approach is adopted in this thread, could people just stop and ponder the following:
All posts can be picked apart, quoted and have their semantics argued over ad nauseum. However, the end result of that approach is just trenches being dug, feet being stamped and lines being drawn in the sand. All to no constructive purpose (hence closure of said thread).
So if deabte of Take2's performance is going to occur, can we at least all agree to simply state our own viewpoints without the insecure need to torpedo someone else's? And perhaps even, fingers crossed, avoid such ridiculously simplistic labels as "whiners", "apologists" or "fanboys"?
?
Much of the flaming in the previous thread seemed to stem from a 'tit for tat' attitude that some posters adopted (inc. myself at times), usually characterised by long posts with many separate quotes accompanied by rebuttals. Before a similar approach is adopted in this thread, could people just stop and ponder the following:
All posts can be picked apart, quoted and have their semantics argued over ad nauseum. However, the end result of that approach is just trenches being dug, feet being stamped and lines being drawn in the sand. All to no constructive purpose (hence closure of said thread).
So if deabte of Take2's performance is going to occur, can we at least all agree to simply state our own viewpoints without the insecure need to torpedo someone else's? And perhaps even, fingers crossed, avoid such ridiculously simplistic labels as "whiners", "apologists" or "fanboys"?
?I second Lobsang's motion, applaud his gesture and include my own contrition for having allowed myself to be lowered into the muck and mire of an unseemly debate. I'm sure we'll all never agree on the issues argued. But I'm also sure we can all agree that CivIV is a game worth being civilized about.
azzaman333
meh
I'm not angry, but disappointed. Disappointed that alexman ignored the largest Civilization community for two weeks when a comment such as "Patch has been delayed for a week/2 weeks/indefinitely" was needed.
Maybe because Apolyton (OT excepted) is free of much of the immature flaming and complaining that goes on so frequently in the Civ 4 forums here?
Maybe that's because CFC has more participants in the forums than Apolyton
Lurking Liu
Prince
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2007
- Messages
- 344
I come here because I like fractious discussions with irritable asses. 
Incidentally, that may be why Firaxis doesn't come here too often.
Moderator Action: Warned! - Trolling
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
Incidentally, that may be why Firaxis doesn't come here too often.
Moderator Action: Warned! - Trolling
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
azzaman333
meh
I know what you mean. Unfortunately, it's hard not to get sucked in to a huge unproductive debate after someone makes a comment that annoys you or provokes you in just the right way.
The one complaint I have about the whole process is that it is bad form to release a patch that actually works backward (3.03) and not follow soon after with a patch that fixes those problems. I don't have the exact release date of 3.03, but it has been about a month. It doesn't have to be the end-all, be-all patch for BtS... but it is tragic that right now the latest version of BtS is worse than the original release, even by admission of Firaxis (it was mistakenly built with an earlier version). I'm not asking for a complete patch with all of the changes implemented that were posted, and/or whatever else they may have. Take your time and produce that. I'm asking for a fix to the big problems, at a minimum the problems introduced with 3.03. Take your time for the big stuff, but fix what you broke at least. (Something to allow us to have a BotM! lol)
I understand problems arise, and I don't mean to sound blameful. I am sure Firaxis and Alexman are doing their best. I just don't understand why there can only be one more patch to BtS. Unless there are some really bad known problems with the current state of 3.13 whatever it may be, I don't understand why it isn't released with whatever subset of the fixes work in the interrim? There can be a "known bugs" section as long as the bugs aren't game-breaking. At least fix the proper unit animations and other things that were broken in the "upgrade" from 3.02 to 3.03.
Sam
I understand problems arise, and I don't mean to sound blameful. I am sure Firaxis and Alexman are doing their best. I just don't understand why there can only be one more patch to BtS. Unless there are some really bad known problems with the current state of 3.13 whatever it may be, I don't understand why it isn't released with whatever subset of the fixes work in the interrim? There can be a "known bugs" section as long as the bugs aren't game-breaking. At least fix the proper unit animations and other things that were broken in the "upgrade" from 3.02 to 3.03.
Sam
entwood
Warlord
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2007
- Messages
- 187
Like the "post" right above yours. I'll try my best. I'm still curious about the Apolyton info, and latest patch date mentioned, the 1st or 2nd. This has not been refuted in any way has it?
MrCynical
Deity
Much as the previous thread became somewhat unsavoury, locking it is hardly going to solve anything (thinking about it, the thread must have been close to the 1000 post lock anyway). The discussion will simply continue in new threads until the patch appears (Monday or Tuesday I seem to recall was suggested).
The change log at the very least should be salvaged from the previous thread, since I doubt it will change that significantly before the actual patch is released (glad I thought to save a copy). It's deletion was essentially a childish response to childish insults being thrown about in that thread. Unfortunately it seems to have scuppered any future attempt at communication by Firaxis, but we may as well salvage what we can from that thread.
I really hope both parties learn from this mess - completely inaccurate communication is worse than none at all, and Firaxis can hardly complain if it is criticised for lack of official and accurate communication. Equally, I can see the mess Alexman must have found himself in. If it was an unofficial effort - well, you know what is said to be paved with good intentions. I never applaud the approach of "if at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence you ever tried", but I can see why he attempted it. There was a lot of abuse thrown in his direction, and if his information was not official, he was in a very awkward position. (That is not however an excuse for total silence from Firaxis, which is what we've had if Alexman's posts were unofficial).
This is a very fair point. Given the lack of any benefit from patch 3.03, it really should have been removed from the update system once it was shown to be buggy. I've yet to hear from anyone who benefited from it, and the bugs in it are well documented - why was a classic in the annals of how not to patch allowed to remain in the update system for a month?
The change log at the very least should be salvaged from the previous thread, since I doubt it will change that significantly before the actual patch is released (glad I thought to save a copy). It's deletion was essentially a childish response to childish insults being thrown about in that thread. Unfortunately it seems to have scuppered any future attempt at communication by Firaxis, but we may as well salvage what we can from that thread.
I really hope both parties learn from this mess - completely inaccurate communication is worse than none at all, and Firaxis can hardly complain if it is criticised for lack of official and accurate communication. Equally, I can see the mess Alexman must have found himself in. If it was an unofficial effort - well, you know what is said to be paved with good intentions. I never applaud the approach of "if at first you don't succeed, destroy all evidence you ever tried", but I can see why he attempted it. There was a lot of abuse thrown in his direction, and if his information was not official, he was in a very awkward position. (That is not however an excuse for total silence from Firaxis, which is what we've had if Alexman's posts were unofficial).
ButSam said:
This is a very fair point. Given the lack of any benefit from patch 3.03, it really should have been removed from the update system once it was shown to be buggy. I've yet to hear from anyone who benefited from it, and the bugs in it are well documented - why was a classic in the annals of how not to patch allowed to remain in the update system for a month?
King of Town
Adventuring
I really hope sooner than later we get a new patch thread kill just like the hitler topics get killed.
Here we go...
alexman said:
and my favorite...
alexman said:
Clearly, his reaction was sub-optimal. While I can see how he'd get upset, the vast, vast majority of the frustration in that thread wasn't "omg alexman lied where is teh patch 11111!!!!" but was "Could they please post an update explaining why the patch is delayed?"
In the time it took alexman to post the above 2 messages he could easily have posted
-> "Guys, hit a snag, could be a while before it's ready"
and everyone would have been fine.
Not trying to flame alexman here, the fault is clearly with Firaxis and Take2 for their pathetic customer relations. The entire process has been handled badly with an "unofficial" patch and a programmer handling the press releases.
I never read the flame war on the previous changelog thread. Sounds juicy.
It's a shame that a few angry dwarves were able to alienate our (civfanatics') one inside man. Now it seems we won't get anymore insider info.
Perhaps those with patience and manners could check apolyton for the info we crave. Here's hoping for a bit of CIV-ility.
Moderator Action: Warned! - Trolling
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
It's a shame that a few angry dwarves were able to alienate our (civfanatics') one inside man. Now it seems we won't get anymore insider info.
Perhaps those with patience and manners could check apolyton for the info we crave. Here's hoping for a bit of CIV-ility.
Moderator Action: Warned! - Trolling
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
- Status
Similar threads
