Will MacSoft PLEASE release an editor?


Jan 29, 2002
Do you have any idea how annoying it is to not be able to edit maps or load scenarios whatsoever? Not only is the fact that we cannot have correct starting locations beyond annoying, but it's even more atrocious that I cannot at least edit things like science rate AT ALL. I love Civ III and play it as many hours as I can per day, but it's ridiculous that Mac users get shafted by not having the full abilities of the PC user. The fact that the interface is so ridiculous is already downright stupid and unmac-like, but please, please RELEASE THE EDITOR!
Originally posted by dw5r
Do you have any idea how annoying it is to not be able to edit maps or load scenarios whatsoever?

Yes, MacSoft will release the editor. It's not ready yet though, and probably won't be until late March. This is one of those situations where there will always be someone upset that the editor didn't ship in the box, where others would prefer the whole package were delayed to include the editor. In the meantime, I ask you to just accept that the editor will arrive a few months later.

For the record, I for one concur completely with the decision to release the game without waiting for the editor. Given the choice between playing Civ 3 now, without the editor, or having to wait until March to play at all - well, from where I sit, it's a no-brainer. And since I'm sure the editor will be released as soon as practicable, I'm not terribly worried about it.
Originally posted by Cunobelin Of Hippo
Perhaps they'll include any patch we're anticipating for the PC editor along with the Mac one ;) A long shot I suppose, bt one could hope :)

I'd settle for a mac-specific patch to fix the preferences issues.

What things do you anticipate Firaxis addressing in their next patch? I've tired of reading infinitely long threads on what people want fixed, especially since most of them are design decisions rather than true bugs.

The one I think is most obvious is preventing the AI from trading during your turn. I.e. you should be able to simultaneously shop tech to all AI opponents. Some allege that the AI trades tech just received among themselves during the player's turn.
Why is it that Firaxis and MacSoft have been unable to come up with the ability to SIMPLY ALLOW STARTING POSITIONS to work? How difficult is that? I CANNOT IMAGINE THAT IT WOULD BE SO HARD!!!!! Yes, I've taken programming, yes, I've learned C and C++ and I cannot imagine the obstacles preventing these corporations, full of talented and brilliant programmers and game designers, from allowing the Romans to start in ROME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why is it that corruption is so terrible? It's RIDICULOUS and an atrocity. Games take twice as long as they should, perhaps, and most of the first several thousand years is spent clicking the return button to wait for your granary or temple to develop. IIIIIIINSANE!

But the truth of the matter is this: I love CivIII. I love CivII, I love CivI. And for me, seeing this beautiful, wonderful, masterpiece of a game with these minor flaws... it brings out the emotion in me that wants to write a scathing review, ,that wants to smite whatever I can with malicious words of discontent. This is only because seeing a scratch on a Picasso is far worse than seeing a major gash in an ordinary painting, because your expectations are higher. Being anointed and granted that CivIII namesake means that this game should be perfect, a paragon of computer games no matter the genre.

Please correct these tiny flaws- I hate seeing CivIII get anything less than perfect ratings. Perhaps I'm biased, and perhaps my fanaticism (I literally have asked my girlfriend to go hang out with her friends when she wanted to spend all day in the bedroom so I could conquer another continent in peace) has been too great. I'm seldom overzealous about games, but this particular work of art and Myth II have become my sole digital havens. Please, I beg of you, fix the cornerstone of your work, for this way the arch of the majestic reputation will never crumble on minor glitches and the resulting major complaints.
I just picked up Civ3 for Mac, and I love it, but I agree with all of these complaints! I want my editor! I want the problems/bugs fixed! This is me whining about unfairness! Uhh... Anyway... I hope things get sorted out, and my big questions is this: will we have to PAY for the editor???:cry:
Has anyone heard anything about a release date on the Mac editor?

I've tried the PC editor under VPC5, but it couldn't find any of the art files, so I spent a good amount of time clicking buttons on dialogue boxes, then when I tried to edit a copy of one of my scenarios, the editor suddenly quit on me.
Brad said recently at MacGamer that "And no, there's no timeframe yet, although I hope to have something useful done by the end of March." Also, that if it isn't done in about the next 4 weeks, schedule crunches will mean it will probably be a LOT longer. So, we're probably talking the first week of April or so.

Also, the editor will be Cocoa ONLY, so anyone playing under 9.x (or 8.6, if anyone is...) will not be able to use it.

As for using the PC editor under VPC, I've posted a few times about that with directions. The threads should be easy to find. What it boils down to is that you must use the 1.16 editor (not 1.17), put it in your Civ3 folder and share that folder, and then you will be able to edit rules but not maps.
Thanks, Beamup. I can get it to work most of the time, the only problem is that it takes forever, since it can't find any of the icons. I have to click through dialogue boxes for each advance icon, then I can edit the rules. Every third time, it quits with an unexpected error.

I actually enjoy this, I've readded the Mongols. I wish I could use the map editing features as well, so I can recreate Mongolia all together. I'd like to try and recreate Temujin's campaigns against the other tartar tribes to become Great Khan.
What's this? The editor is only going to run in OSX???!!!! i can't believe this is true. That would definitely be the last slap in the face from MacSoft. I use OS 9--i bought the game based on advertisements of it that clearly indicate an editor, i have been promised an editor to be "coming soon" after being disappointed to find it not to be in the box. This news only ads to my already existent dissatisfaction with this game and its publishers. i feel so ripped off on practically every aspect of this game. Now this news?
i'm trying to use the win-editor. but everytime i only touch the bic file, civ III (mac) quits with error 2 ?!? i'm using civ 1.17g. the win editor say it's version 1.11 (german). can anyone help me please? do i need another editor? if yes, where can i get it?

thanks :egypt:
Is the editor going to be OS X only? Or will 9.x be supported. I'd really like to know.....
To quote a post Brad made on macgamer about a week and a half ago, "It's going to be a Cocoa app, and I've been working on it for about the past month." So, X only.
i still think the biggest mistake macsoft has done was make the app carbon... and the interface is rediculous... even following a couple of apple's guidelines would have been nice... the game runs slow, even on my 733 G4 with 640 megs of ram - if it were coaca i'm sure it'd go faster.. and QUARTZ, what a joke...

sorry i'm critizing, its just that I *would* have waited 3 or 4 months to get the game if it had been well tested, faster, and only supported X. I mean after all - every major app has been ported to X now, and you still have the option of 2 systems on the machine! I know that brad's workin hard on it, but when i can run games like Alice at a nice fast speed, i can't see why civ 3, which doesn't use 3d rendering, is slow! Oh well i'm done complaining, maybe i'll go play civ 2 on virtual pc. It runs fast, has little to no major bugs, has an editor, losta scenarios.... well you get the gist.
on 9.2.2, giving it 384 MB to play with. Yeah, Modern Age turns take some time with all the animations on on a huge map, but then, that's understandable...I'm only playing on a G4/500 after all :smoke:

But, I'll feel real cheated if the editor is X only, when the main game is 9 or X. If the game was X only, fine. I would have known going in I'd have to load X before getting the game, but making the main game 9/X, and the editor X only is kinda screwy. I mean it's no big deal to load X on here, as I work with computers for a living, but it will be a pain to dual boot, as some of my games don't work well with X. It's the principle of it...

Oh, and I've run the PC version on a comparable CPU (Gig P3, 384, Win2K, 32 MB Geforce 3) and there's no comparison. The PC version just crawls compared to this. And the virtual PC? It is to laugh. Not even in the same league.
Originally posted by senecasax
he game runs slow, even on my 733 G4 with 640 megs of ram - if it were coaca i'm sure it'd go faster..

I'm equally sure it'd run at exactly the same speed. Carbon or Cocoa, most of the CPU time in Civ3 is spent running the AI.

I know that brad's workin hard on it, but when i can run games like Alice at a nice fast speed, i can't see why civ 3, which doesn't use 3d rendering, is slow!

Because rendering isn't the bulk of the work in Civ3 - it's the AI. FWIW, Alice is a Carbon app.

Never mind...see link below provided by Beamup. Read the thread....

(Not Brad...the rest of us...)

A bit OT, as far as trusting game companies and software companies in general: Many companies have been shown the way by the wonderful :smoke: people at Microsoft. It's all about the money. Forcing upgrades to OSes is a wonderful thing, don't you know? More money for them, and more for Apple, too. Oh, well. Life is that way.
sorry bout that i was just mad at the game at the time, you know a lot more than me about mac programming so i think you know best
Originally posted by Mavfin
You still didn't answer whether the editor's going to be usable on 9 or X or both... :smoke:

I for one would like to know straight from you, rather than just someone saying 'Brad said..' (no offense to the person who wrote that...)

Here's the link to the post I was quoting:
MacGamer thread

Also some, shall we say, vigorous discussion of the implications.

Oh, and no offense taken - as you can see in the thread above, the discussion basically started when I said more or less the exact same thing to someone else.;)
Top Bottom