Funny ppl and GOOO Activision ;)

aCa · October 31, 2000, 19:14

I must say that some of you guys are very funny.Coming with all sorts about crap about the game before it's released. All the reviews of the BETA have been positive! In the midle of the positive reviews you find a line where is say that there are some bugs in the BETA. OH NO! They found a bug in the beta, the final game have to be very buggy, LOL! As I said I find this very, VERY funny. When one of you found all the bugs one of the reviews had noticed (can't remember witch review) and listed them up in a thred, some nice guy from Activision whent through all the bugs listed and told about the fixes they had made.

The next issue some of you guys have gone balistic over is, why it isn't possible to build canals. As I see it this is just a very small issue. Yes it would be cool to build canals, but is it really that important? Is it really that stupid, that you have to think before you place your cities. There is noo need for all your cities to be coastal cities, thats just not mean't too be!

Only 8 civ! Like some wise guys said it before me here on the board (sry don't remember who) It's mutch better to have 8 GOOD AI's then 32 crappy AI's. And the number of civ's is probably going to be editable anyway.

I admit it's sad that there is no PBEM or Hotseat support, but I'll survive. This is a thing they could add later. There is no need to delay the realease just
becouse some lazy ppl don't wanne download a couple of mb uppdate later.

I hear some ppl say that the graphics are the same as in CTP1. If you have been studdying the screens from CTP2 you'll see the graphics have been impoved. personally I wouldn't mind if they used the EXACT same graphics as in CTP1. Graphics doesn't matter mutch in CIV games. It never have and it probably never will. It's the gameplay thats so damd addictive

I really don't know what so say. It's hard for me understand what your problems are... Did you get sooo disapointed about CTP1 that you are afraid of getting "hurt" again? Are you guys just here to bug the ppl who are really looking forward to the realease?
Hard to tell what the real problem is ...... whatever the reason is, I don't understand why you bother beeing on this board. Some of you guys say that this game is going to sux and you don't wanne buy it, why bother read about it?

I'll think MarkG and DanQ does a greate job and keeps on working with this page, nomatter how may lame ppl that post stupid threads here (no offence to all you nice ppl

) And I also say I really appreciate that the nice ppl from Activision take time and answer our questions. Hope you game is going to be great

Wow this became a bit long ...

Looking forward to the game is out..

aCa@civ

Member of Anonymous Civilization Addicts

Tical_2000 · October 31, 2000, 19:52

Dear aCa,

I guess I'm one of the ones you mentioned that went 'ballistic' over the 8 civs thing. Well, I'm sorry I offended you and all the other saps who worship all those computer geek programmers at Activision who are getting rich pumping out half-finished games. But over 1000 Apolyton forum posters can't be wrong: We EXPECTED at least 12-16 civs and we were shortchanged. I'm not saying the people at Activision aren't nice for answering our questions but its obvious they haven't taken fan feedback as serious as many of us would like them to. In short, I feel sorry for you and all the others who will buy this game and feel as though they've shortchanged and will rush to the internet to provide them with countless patches and modification pack insanity.

meriadoc · October 31, 2000, 20:28

Funny, I don't remember Activision saying that there would be more than 8 civs in a game....

------------------
The Electronic Hobbit

Nemo · October 31, 2000, 20:45

meriadoc: no they didn't say it, but they did implement it in the first CTP - in a very "we can, but not enough time to finish" kind of way. they they dropped it all together. so, no, they didnt say it - they just showed us that it was possible, but never fixed it.

------------------
"Programming is like sex: one mistake and you have to support it for the rest of your life."
-Michael Sinz

Otto von Bismarck · October 31, 2000, 22:06

I don't really see why everbody is getting so upset. I mean, what the heck to you expect?? Total perfection? Let's face it: there isn't a single game that includes features which everybody wants. Furthermore, it's simply a game, and, although it may not fufill your every gaming desire, it will most likely be far more enjoyable than almost all other games out there - canals or not.

It also seems that the reviews have all been posative! I mean, there had been some concern over minor bugs addressed in the articles, but it seemed to me that these problems were fixed.

I suppose I just don't know what everybody expects. If you expect heaven on earth, then you probably won't find it. But, if you want a game where you can spend some fun-filled hours, it seems to me that, judging from the reviews, you'll probably find it in Call to Power II.

------------------
Blut und Eisen

November 1, 2000, 02:46

AMEN aCa!

Nemo, not putint more than 8 "legal" civs in ctp1 was not a matter of time. it was(and is) all about the quality of the ai you want, the resources it needs, and the level of minimal requirements you target for.

btw, it will still be possible to have 32 civs, just not "legal"...
[This message has been edited by MarkG (edited November 01, 2000).]

Atahualpa · November 1, 2000, 05:54

quote:

Originally posted by aCa on 10-31-2000 06:14 PM
I must say that some of you guys are very funny.Coming with all sorts about crap about the game before it's released. All the reviews of the BETA have been positive! In the midle of the positive reviews you find a line where is say that there are some bugs in the BETA. OH NO! They found a bug in the beta, the final game have to be very buggy, LOL! As I said I find this very, VERY funny. When one of you found all the bugs one of the reviews had noticed (can't remember witch review) and listed them up in a thred, some nice guy from Activision whent through all the bugs listed and told about the fixes they had made.

Ok then I tell YOU something: I was here when CtP1 came out, it was praised as hell, all people loved Activision and then we got the game and it turned out to be far away from our expectations. The AI sucked so much, trading technologies still crashes the game (even after the 2nd Patch and even because I said a hundred times that there is a problem with trading techs, I even sent them savegames explaining the probs and all...

(does that one make mad?

). Besides, if they stick to it [the release date], they just have less than 1 month to finish the game. Now they needed 6 Months(!) to patch CtP1. Guess what they will be able to fix in 1 Month!
You and I want the same: A great game! But I am more cautious. I have lost most of my faith in Activision. Still I hope and want to believe. I dont want to be disappointed again!

quote:

Only 8 civ! Like some wise guys said it before me here on the board (sry don't remember who) It's mutch better to have 8 GOOD AI's then 32 crappy AI's. And the number of civ's is probably going to be editable anyway.

Sure its editable, but when they support only 8 civs, that would also mean that the official scenarios will only have 8 civs

quote:

I admit it's sad that there is no PBEM or Hotseat support, but I'll survive. This is a thing they could add later. There is no need to delay the realease just becouse some lazy ppl don't wanne download a couple of mb uppdate later.

lazy? Sorry guy, but I do pay telefon charges here. Besides did you know it took CtP1 6 Months to add PBEM?

quote:

I hear some ppl say that the graphics are the same as in CTP1. If you have been studdying the screens from CTP2 you'll see the graphics have been impoved. personally I wouldn't mind if they used the EXACT same graphics as in CTP1. Graphics doesn't matter mutch in CIV games. It never have and it probably never will. It's the gameplay thats so damd addictive

Thats true, but examine it from the other side round. Would ugly graphics destroy the gameplay? I dont feel very comfortable when I view a standard CtP Map. When there is desert next to arctic tiles and all clustered and ugly. Now look at a Civ2 Map and examine the tiles there. It looks much nicer! Much more "balanced" if you know what I mean.
I do think the "graphics are not important thing" is a big myth. They are important! But you dont notice their importance first. They add to the overall atmosphere.
Look at Smac, I didnt like the game, everything was so dark and only 256 colors. I didnt like Smacs graphics. That reduced a lot of atmosphere. (and I am not the only person that said that)

quote:

I really don't know what so say. It's hard for me understand what your problems are... Did you get sooo disapointed about CTP1 that you are afraid of getting "hurt" again?

Exactly! I want to play a great game!
A question to you: Have you played CtP1?
Hey, one thing: When you have found that out and understand that, why do you draw such a good vs bad line here?

quote:

Are you guys just here to bug the ppl who are really looking forward to the realease?

Yep! At least me! If it would be for me, they should release the game Q1 2001. I rather wait 4 months longer and have a great game then, than having a half-finished game now. Thats my philosophy. And the only company so far following this philosophy is: Blizzard Entertainment!

quote:

Hard to tell what the real problem is ...... whatever the reason is, I don't understand why you bother beeing on this board. Some of you guys say that this game is going to sux and you don't wanne buy it, why bother read about it?

I have been here when CtP1 was released.
I guess you too (thats what your registration date said). I dont say it is going to suck! I say: "Activision dont screw it up this time!" There is a big difference.
And I bother to read it, cause I want a great game! And somehow I still think the game can turn out great, although I have lost lots of faith. I would thank Activision if they can convince me with the opposite.
Besides why I read this hear is none of your buisness and you are the last person to disallow me to do this!

quote:

I'll think MarkG and DanQ does a greate job and keeps on working with this page, nomatter how may lame ppl that post stupid threads here (no offence to all you nice ppl

) And I also say I really appreciate that the nice ppl from Activision take time and answer our questions. Hope you game is going to be great

Dont draw a: We are good, you are bad line here! That sucks! I also appreciate that Activisioners listen to the forums and I have expressed that a hundred times. More times than YOU. And I am definatly not LAME! OKAY? I just dislike people with such a narrow mind as you have!

I guess you have a different opinion now! If not, I cant help you.

Ata
[This message has been edited by Atahualpa (edited November 01, 2000).]

Atahualpa · November 1, 2000, 05:59

quote:

Originally posted by Otto von Bismarck on 10-31-2000 09:06 PM
I don't really see why everbody is getting so upset. I mean, what the heck to you expect?? Total perfection? Let's face it: there isn't a single game that includes features which everybody wants. Furthermore, it's simply a game, and, although it may not fufill your every gaming desire, it will most likely be far more enjoyable than almost all other games out there - canals or not.

Now tell me, why, as gamer, I dont have the right to ask for perfection?

quote:

It also seems that the reviews have all been posative! I mean, there had been some concern over minor bugs addressed in the articles, but it seemed to me that these problems were fixed.

Previews not reviews (if they were reviews, I wouldnt buy the game

)! I am cautious! Just cautious!

quote:

I suppose I just don't know what everybody expects. If you expect heaven on earth, then you probably won't find it. But, if you want a game where you can spend some fun-filled hours, it seems to me that, judging from the reviews, you'll probably find it in Call to Power II.

I want LOTS of fun-filled hours, not only some. I had "some" with CtP1. I want LOTS! The ultimate CIV-DRUG!

Ata

aCa · November 1, 2000, 06:21

quote:

Originally posted by Atahualpa on 11-01-2000 04:54 AM
Sure its editable, but when they support only 8 civs, that would also mean that the official scenarios will only have 8 civs

I have to admit that is could be fun with more civs, but really not the most important part. We have to concider that the cities needs mutch more space then in CTP1. The map would be very crouded with many more civs. But in the scenarios it would be usefull with more civs ....

quote:

Besides did you know it took CtP1 6 Months to add PBEM?

I know it took 6 months to add PBEM to CTP1. I really hope they can do it quicker now. They have some experience in that field so they should have a chance to do it quicker now .... crossing my fingers

quote:

A question to you: Have you played CtP1?

Yes I have played CTP1. I have played it alot. I have been adicted to civ since Sid Meier came out with his first civilization game (was it 1991?). CTP1 wasn't as addictive as the previus civ games but still a ok game .... not great.

quote:

I have been here when CtP1 was released.
I guess you too (thats what your registration date said). I dont say it is going to suck! I say: "Activision dont screw it up this time!" There is a big difference.
And I bother to read it, cause I want a great game! And somehow I still think the game can turn out great, although I have lost lots of faith. I would thank Activision if they can convince me with the opposite.

I have been here since the CTP1 was released. Havn't been very active since school and work takes mutch of my time. But now I'm in here about 5 times each day

Good you say that the game doesn't sux. Becouse the ppl who say that have no thing to back that statement up with. So there I didn't talk about you .... becouse there are other ppl here that are SURE it will sux.

quote:

I just dislike people with such a narrow mind as you have!

I have one thing to say to that: LOL!

quote:

I want LOTS of fun-filled hours, not only some. I had "some" with CtP1. I want LOTS! The ultimate CIV-DRUG!

Atleast we agree about one thing!!!!

aCa@civ

Damd this addiction .....

MidKnight Lament · November 1, 2000, 10:10

Good on you for speaking up, aCa.

I'm still hesitant about the way the game's going to turn out, but it's really not worth everyone getting fired up about it until we can take a look at it ourselves.

It'd be a damn shame if the Activision guys stop posting here as often because there's so much friction at the moment.

------------------
- MKL
"And of course Henry The Horse dances the waltz!"
Shameless Plug: http://www.poetic-license.org celebrates it's First Birthday! All welcome.

Big Dave · November 1, 2000, 12:49

Why are you degenerating into name calling, aCa? I have not flung mud at anyone. I have pointed out behavior that I was not pleased with by Activision (and other companies). And the emotional "Afraid of getting hurt again?" nonsense shouldn't even be a real question from anyone who's read more than 2 of my posts. If it's hard to tell what the real problem is then you'd better go back and reread my posts again. I think I've been pretty clearr about this but I'll go ahead and spell it out for you again anyway.

I don't want to buy unfinished products. If everyone else buys unfinished products that is all there will be on the market.

The following paragraph is not intended to be inflamitory or a personal attack on anyone in any fashion. Rather it is intended to be a look at some facets of our society today expressed in a second person format.

Now I realize that you're probably a GenX'er (or later) who's been marketed to all your life and you're very vulnerable to all the right-brain hype that the corporations bedazzle you with. But I would encourage you to stop "feeling" your decisions and consider the facts.

The fact is that Activision is taking out numerous features that were in a previous game. New games are supposed to have more features for deeper game play. You have said "They can add it later". Yeah, they can, but will they? "A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush" as the old saying goes. Over 6 months to add PBEM support, they never officially recognized that their combat system was broken and even turned down a free fix for it (CD's mod). Well, they've recognized it now, as evidenced by the totally rewritten combat system adding armor values, etc.

As for perfection, I'll ask for it every time I please. However if I seriously expect it i'm going to be dissapointed alot of the time. But perfection is not what I'm asking for. I'm asking for a product that is over 75% finished. I am, after all, paying over 75% of the asking price for it. And all it would take to finish the product is a little more time. I see nothing wrong with a Q1 2001 release. Ok, you miss the Christmas buying frenzy. Guess, what, people have money after the first of the year. And if you write a good product people will be buying it for some time to come. You might not have to release more than two patches for this one if you finish it before releaseing it. But U.S. companies are notorius for not having any long term vision. They've got to look good for the stockholders but only for one quarter at a time.

I think Markos and Dan also do a wonderful job here, and I'm thankful for an open forum where I can voice a dissenting opinion. I am also glad that Activision has sent many of their people to this forum and that they have implimented some of our suggestions. On a more personal note, I even like all the Activisioners that I've met in here. I'm still not sure what that has to do with this conversation, though.

I'll leave you with this quote from Robert Heinlein. "The sign of a true mark is that you can fleece him again and again." That's not verbatim, but it is faithful to the idea he was trying to convey.

------------------
Big Dave

My karma ran over my dogma.

aCa · November 1, 2000, 14:25

quote:

Originally posted by Big Dave on 11-01-2000 11:49 AM
And the emotional "Afraid of getting hurt again?" nonsense shouldn't even be a real question from anyone who's read more than 2 of my posts. If it's hard to tell what the real problem is then you'd better go back and reread my posts again. I think I've been pretty clearr about this but I'll go ahead and spell it out for you again anyway.

Hmmz .... I can't remember naming any names in my post. Why you feel such a eager to defend yourself? I wrote a general post of the complaints that have been posted here lately. I have no problem to accept that some are sceptic, but when ppl say it going to sux for sure without anything backing thair statement up is just stupid.

quote:

And all it would take to finish the product is a little more time. I see nothing wrong with a Q1 2001 release.

I actuall think the game may be very good as it is now. If they delay the release I think the only thing they would add is PBEM and hotseat. Those two things are something I can live without at the beginning. No problems for me to download them later (I agree that they have to give out a patch for it and that they have to give it out quicker then last time).

And I just wanne say that I'm a 20 year old Civilization addict that only play CIV (and one crappy online game called Subspace

). I loose interest in all other games after playing the them a time or two.

aCa@civ

November 1, 2000, 14:55

quote:

Originally posted by Big Dave on 11-01-2000 11:49 AM
they never officially recognized that their combat system was broken and even turned down a free fix for it (CD's mod).

i think you gave yourself the answer

quote:

Well, they've recognized it now, as evidenced by the totally rewritten combat system adding armor values, etc.

how often to do you see a big company PUBICLY accepting an error and a free solution from a "simple user"?

Paulypav · November 1, 2000, 15:46

I too, think that everyone is overreacting to some minor points in the previews, most of which seem to have been addressed. I would have liked to have more than 8 civs , but not at the risk of reducing AI intelligence.

While I never used PBEM, I think it would have been good for Activision to have included it, since they were able to create a patch for CTP. It seems safe to say that it will be less than 6 months for them to patch it this time as long as those of you who want PBEM make sure they know it, and do so in a calm and reasonable manner. So many of the posts sound like whining more than reasonable requests for the inclusion of a feature.

I think we should be thankful that Activision is willing to participate in the forums here and that individuals like Pyaray provide timely responses, I only wish he had been involved earlier in the process.

Thanks also to Mark and Dan for their work keeping the forums together.

------------------
"In war, there is no substitute for victory."
- Douglas MacArthur

red_jon · November 1, 2000, 16:04

Why are people feeling SORRY for Activision.

They are getting lots of money from US who are paying for thier games, so they are expected to release a quality product.

ITS THEIR JOBS!

They can't release a bug-filled, unimproved game and expect us to patch it up later, just because they want their cash£$ a few months earlier!(however, I am confident they won't, I'm looking forward to CTP2).

Bugs like those in CTP1 should not have allowed the game to get past quality control.

------------------
...And if the British Commonwealth and its people live for a thousand years, man will still say "this was their finest hour"- Winston Churchill.

Pyaray · November 1, 2000, 17:46

A quick note.

quote:

Originally posted by Big Dave on 11-01-2000 11:49 AM
I am also glad that Activision has sent many of their people to this forum and that they have implimented some of our suggestions.

Activision does not "send" us here. We do this on our own time. This is not part of our job. Those of us who post on forums like these do it because we are gamers ourselves, and we know how important forums like this are to the games we play. Personally I don't think I'd make it without my EQ forum.

Pyaray

Paulypav · November 1, 2000, 17:49

Actually, I don't think anyone says they feel Sorry for Activision, its more that people seem to be complaining way too much. Yes, Activision wants to get the product out by Christmas and the programmers are working to get the best product out by that date. I still think that even without PBEM and Hotseat that CTP-II will be much better than CTP.

------------------
"In war, there is no substitute for victory."
- Douglas MacArthur
[This message has been edited by Paulypav (edited November 01, 2000).]

red_jon · November 1, 2000, 18:07

Of course CTP2 will be better than the original.

I'm really looking forward to it even without (sigh) Hotseat

(Oh, and £3.99 is a good price to sell it for in England, especially in Eastbourne

)

------------------
...And if the British Commonwealth and its people live for a thousand years, man will still say "this was their finest hour"- Winston Churchill.

meriadoc · November 1, 2000, 18:43

Okay, at the risk of sounding pro-Activision.

First of all, thanks to all of the Activision team who posts on this forum.

Second, since I doubt that any of us has yet to play CTP2, can we at least tone-down the criticism.

Third, I agree that CTP2 will be better than CTP1. Okay, so we didn't get canals, we didn't get PBEM and Hotseat, we can't officially use more than 8 civs. So what do we get that CTP1 didn't have?
-Improved diplomacy
-Improved AI
-Improved user interface, including a City Screen
-Improved combat, including bigger stacks that can be named
-The elimination of the horses beating jets bug
-Mutally Assured Destruction
-Included scenario support
-More underwater features, including an AI who knows what a navy is
-And more...

------------------
The Electronic Hobbit
[This message has been edited by meriadoc (edited November 01, 2000).]

Daniel Frappier · November 1, 2000, 18:48

Concerning the 8 Civ limit,

All that we wanted is the option to modify it from the game and a scroll bar on the diplomacy menu, it would not have increased system requirements and it would not have required that the AI be less smart.

If you take Age of Empire from Ensemble studio as an example they give you the option to play with 200 units at the same time but you won't be able to do it if you have a Pentium 200. It's nice to have the option for peoples with higher end machine.

It is a marketing decision from Activision, a marketing decision that gives us an inferior game compared to what it could have been and as a customer that's the kind of thing that makes me real mad.

November 2, 2000, 17:03

Well..Well..Well..
I am a HAPPY CIV CAMPER..Mr.CTP:1 type supporter..and YES..I think CTP:1 was and IS STILL a great game and I have had soo many fun-filled hours..single player and Online as Patton..DrDanger Die Hard..Wolfpack..Red October..I change my alias so it is harder for me to be tracked in my conquest attempts!!

I am just so darn befuddled as to why we have so many Whineey-Pots who slam CTP..and Apolyton..and I gotta be honest to all you little sweethearts who cry ..GROW UP..If ya dont like it..dont buy it..if you are so darned dissatisfied then dont talk about it..Hey its a free country.here in America..be my guest..but for real..if it sucked so Badly..why keep addressing it?..I mean..it had to be somewhat good..or you wouldnt have been playing the Crying game?..eh?
~smirk~..(opening arms..motioning to my little whiney pots)..come tell yo' Daddy what's the matter!!

God Bless
Have a blessed Day..
Brother Bruce Cronkite

Tical_2000 · November 2, 2000, 21:35

After much thought, I would like to apologize to Mark G and the good folks at Activision who have given up their free time to answer our questions. In the past few days, I have put up some posts attacking Mark G personally and for this I'm sorry. This is a world class site. I was and still am a bit dissapointed with the latest developments in the CTP2 saga but I acted immaturely. From now on, I will only make posts with mature substance and strictly game-related topics. Its seems a thick line has now divided those who are infuriated with Activision and those who support them. I think I'm the middle now. I will purchase CTP2 (as I know everyone who posts here will, regardless of what they say) because I'm sure Activision has worked hard on it therefore making it worthy of a try. If it is frustrating, then oh well, life goes on. But maybe we should stop whining about what cannot be fixed and start barraging the Activision folks with our questions about the game. It seems like its a real hot time for questions and answers thanks to the dedication of Pyaray.

-Tical...the final Shaolin warrior

Big Dave · November 3, 2000, 00:56

I will not buy it unless they produce a quality product. I realize that the majority of my posts have sounded negative lately, and you're right, Ata, I don't know it's going to be bad. To be fair there are alot of new features that, if the game is well put together and these features correctly implimented, promise to make this a landmark game in this genre (TBS). Unfortunatly this genre consists of two games (Civ and CTP) by two companies, Firaxis and Activision.

Oh, and Dr. Bubba (or whatever your name is this week), if you don't like these threads, don't read them. You're probably a Microsheep, too, and don't understand why the DOJ brought anti-trust charges against them.

But Activision's track record makes me leary. And no one on here has offered to loan me $5000 yet.

I just don't get it......

------------------
Big Dave

My karma ran over my dogma.

MidKnight Lament · November 3, 2000, 01:45

quote:

Originally posted by Big Dave on 11-02-2000 11:56 PM
Unfortunatly this genre consists of two games (Civ and CTP) by two companies, Firaxis and Activision.

Pardon? I must be reading you incorrectly.

I'm pretty happy that there are two companies making civ games. It means more games, and best of all, it means they'll push each other to come up with good new features.

------------------
- MKL
"And of course Henry The Horse dances the waltz!"
Shameless Plug: http://www.poetic-license.org .............All welcome.

November 3, 2000, 04:44

quote:

Originally posted by Big Dave on 11-02-2000 11:56 PM
this genre (TBS). Unfortunatly this genre consists of two games (Civ and CTP) by two companies, Firaxis and Activision.

TBS? nope. there is more "non-civ" tbs out there....

Big Dave · November 3, 2000, 10:25

quote:

Originally posted by MidKnight Lament on 11-03-2000 12:45 AM
Pardon? I must be reading you incorrectly.

I'm pretty happy that there are two companies making civ games. It means more games, and best of all, it means they'll push each other to come up with good new features.

Sorry, I meant that to read "...only two...."

Markos, who else is making a Civ style TBS (other than Clash, which is no where near completion)? I know there's other TBS out there (Warlords, HOMMIII) but my interest is primarily in historical gaming.

Don't mistake me on Clash, I'm looking forward to it. Talk about revolutionary!! But it's an unproven, unknown quantity so far.

------------------
Big Dave

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me!

John Amram · November 3, 2000, 12:26

To all:

I have played civ1 and was totally hooked. I have played civ2 and was totally hooked, never playing civ1 again. I have played CTP 1 and was TOTALLY hooked, never playing civ2 again. I have had non-stop marathons of up to 15 hours!!!

The following is absolutely true: I have destroyed my CTP 1 disc on 3 occasions only to buy it again a few weeks later because I was spending too much time on it. It's when I began to master the Deity level that I finally found peace. I became bored, and subsequently healed of my addiction.

Perfect or not, I feel like a serious addict when I am telling you that I simply cannot wait for CTP2 to be released. If it's at least as good as CTP1 I'll buy it, and I am assuming it will be.

Johnny

'Our greatest glory is not in never falling, but in rising everytime we fall.' Confucius

November 3, 2000, 12:48

i said "non-civ"

quote:

there is more "non-civ" tbs out there....

Atahualpa · November 3, 2000, 12:48

Thats great to hear Amram and I wish I could say the same from myself, but unfortunately I havent had so much fun with CtP1. Tech trading didnt work (due to a bug) and this is a feature I use very often in a civ game.
The combat was great, but with modern times most games grew boring. Tanks and such made it easy to overrun the enemy who was far behind in technology.

ata

Big Dave · November 4, 2000, 15:08

quote:

Originally posted by MarkG on 11-03-2000 11:48 AM
i said "non-civ"

Right, sorry I missed that the first time. "Non-civ" TBS, does that mean like Stars! or SE4 or are we still talking historical games like Imperialism 2?

And don't misunderstand me, I don't hate Activision. I very well may end up buying CTP2 if I see patches that correct the "problems" I'm hearing about, or if they turn out to not be problems. But I want to see that Activision is going to support their product. That is the main issue I have with them. And ultimately it will be a marketing decision, not a programming one. Based on past experience this does not bode well for CTP2.

And I still haven't had anyone offer (or even comment on my request for) $5000.

------------------
Big Dave

Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me!