Dissapointing virus

Rebel Rick · November 1, 2000, 09:08

Hey there, dissapoinfected people!

I just don't understand one thing:

Why is here that quantity of "i-hate-Activision-&-CTP2-even-before-seeing-it" people? What is the meaning of beeing dissapointed in advance and still accesing the forum 10 times a day?

I know the experience with Activision has some shadows (big shadows, as it seems). But from the previews it seems also that they have worked hard to improve the many good ideas that arised with CTP1 on this genre.

I am an old civ-gamer, like most of you. I remember my long "one more turn" episodes when i was in the middle of the university, playing Civ1...

CTP, buggy or not, is a hughe improvement over that first love. If they manage to improve so many good ideas from CTP1, it will be fun for sure.

Don't be dissapointed in advance. I would like to see my face on the opening screen too, but this feature is not implemented (yet...). Still, whitout this feature, CTP2 should be a great game...

Take a vaccine to fight the infection, ok?

aCa · November 1, 2000, 09:26

Nice to hear someone talk sende here on the board. The last day it havn't been mutch of that

aCa@civ

Slax · November 1, 2000, 10:10

Perhaps if someone who had played a recent build of the game came on here and gave a detailled description of the AI performing some very intelligent actions, that might soothe the crowd somewhat.

Tilemacho · November 1, 2000, 11:06

Rebel Rick: If you wasn't here to know what happend short period before and soon after the release of CTP1 then you can't really understand us.
The reason so many negative messages are posted is that many of us don't want to let Activision cheat others the same way like it cheated us 1.5 years ago!
Personally I won't buy the game until PBEM is available and the reviews say it is worth buying.
My advise is: DONT RUSH...one week sooner or later won't make such a big difference (although I know about addiction

) wait to see what others think of the game.

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

Rebel Rick · November 1, 2000, 11:34

quote:

Originally posted by Tilemacho on 11-01-2000 10:06 AM
Rebel Rick: If you wasn't here to know what happend short period before and soon after the release of CTP1 then you can't really understand us.
The reason so many negative messages are posted is that many of us don't want to let Activision cheat others the same way like it cheated us 1.5 years ago!
Personally I won't buy the game until PBEM is available and the reviews say it is worth buying.
My advise is: DONT RUSH...one week sooner or later won't make such a big difference (although I know about addiction

) wait to see what others think of the game.

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

Oh, baby...

i bought CTP1 AFTER all the bad reviews and ALL the "throw-****-over-CTP" has been started... you know why? Because the reviews showed (almost indirectly) a whole new bunch of revolutionary ideas that where part of the game (Come on, you don't like your stack of Cavalry beeing defeated by a lucky shot of a stupid and turtle-like catapult, do you?)...

I was dissapointed too, with the flaws... but i was very happy that someones decided to improve on new ideas... unconventional warfare, real-stacking, combined arms...

We agree: there was a lot of stuff left out, there were some major glitches, the AI was not Einstein, but this can all be fixed.

And my hope is: now it will.

If you don't believe, i understand you. It's ok. But don't destroy my believe. Just be quiet. True hopeless are reeally, really quiet...

It is hope that has a voice...

Good luck after the first weeks when you will try to find some copy of CTP2...

Pyaray · November 1, 2000, 17:06

quote:

Originally posted by Slax on 11-01-2000 09:10 AM
Perhaps if someone who had played a recent build of the game came on here and gave a detailled description of the AI performing some very intelligent actions, that might soothe the crowd somewhat.

The only people who have played recent builds of the game are internal to Activision. Would a review from one of us make any difference? I seriously doubt it. I suspect that we would just be told we were biased, and that we really need someone unbiased to review it. Of course nobody who is unbiased has seen a recent build, which puts as back firmly into square one.

Pyaray

November 1, 2000, 19:17

well, Sid first, we will be having our preview builds soon... but then again some people consider us activision employees, so...

Slax · November 1, 2000, 19:43

Wasn't there talk of some reviewer "playing all weekend" in order to write a review? Are you saying the builds they had wouldn't make good examples?

Pyaray · November 1, 2000, 19:58

quote:

Originally posted by Slax on 11-01-2000 06:43 PM
Wasn't there talk of some reviewer "playing all weekend" in order to write a review? Are you saying the builds they had wouldn't make good examples?

Anything you're seeing reviewed now is probably a month old. Just think of the practicality of it and it makes sense. We don't send out untested versions. So whatever version we decided to send out we probably had in QA for a week prior to sending it. Then we had to burn gazillions of copies to send to reviewers the world over. Then those all had to get packaged up and sent. And few days to a week just to get it burnt, packaged and mailed. Figure a couple days for mailing, and you're talking at least 2-3 weeks with no wasted time. Odds are, since sending out copies isn't our highest priority, it sat on somebodies desk a few days. Add to that the time to review it, and post the reviews, and you see a month old isn't all the unimaginable. Undoubtedely the versions they are reviewing are feature complete, meaning there probably won't be any features that they haven't seen. But play balance and bugs have changed drastically. And AI is part of play balance.

Pyaray

Monkey · November 1, 2000, 21:27

If the betas that they have played are feature complete then how come none of them seem to mention the new M.A.D feature involving nukes? What happened to it? I don't think I've heard anything since Mr Ogre announced it on these forums a while back. Did it get cut too or havent the reviewers played enough to reach to the nuclear stage?

Pyaray · November 1, 2000, 21:44

quote:

Originally posted by Monkey on 11-01-2000 08:27 PM
If the betas that they have played are feature complete then how come none of them seem to mention the new M.A.D feature involving nukes? What happened to it? I don't think I've heard anything since Mr Ogre announced it on these forums a while back. Did it get cut too or havent the reviewers played enough to reach to the nuclear stage?

Beats me, it's still in, and works fine.

Pyaray

Slax · November 2, 2000, 00:31

Pyaray - I'm only trying to quell some of the anger showing up on some threads by suggesting that someone give us some AI strategy examples.
No matter what version they received, the recent reviews were positive when it came to AI. Because of this, I think most of us would believe an Activision employee's observations (and it would make us feel good!

).

aCa · November 2, 2000, 08:32

quote:

Originally posted by Pyaray on 11-01-2000 04:06 PM
Would a review from one of us make any difference? I seriously doubt it

I would VERY mutch love hearing a review of CTP2 written of somone in Activision. Maybe we can get some more information that we havn't gotten in the magazine reviews.

Rebel Rick · November 2, 2000, 09:17

quote:

Originally posted by aCa on 11-02-2000 07:32 AM
I would VERY mutch love hearing a review of CTP2 written of somone in Activision. Maybe we can get some more information that we havn't gotten in the magazine reviews.

JUST DO IT, MAN !!!

DO IT, DO IT DO IT... and let us judge the validity or not of your review.

Go on, Activisioneer!

Atahualpa · November 2, 2000, 16:16

A month old? THANK GOD! That was what I wanted to hear! Makes me hope again!
I really really look forward to a challenging AI.

ATa

Nemo · November 2, 2000, 18:16

Monkey - just an oberservation, but since i wsa wondering the samething about MAD, i noticed that not many of the reviews had REALLY advanced screen shots. and with teh cheat and editor in there (i am assuming they were in there anyway) it is possible that they may have editted teh more advanced screens rather than actually played it. often the game reviewers don't paly that deep into the game before *reviewing* it - then they jsut use some prop some screen shots for the article.
might be way off, but thats been my experience with more than enough software preview companies.

November 2, 2000, 20:22

exactly nemo!

i mean, the IGN have had the best ctp2 coverage so far, but when i combine the 800-1100 number of turns with the time period of a weekend....
something doesnt fit right...

Slax · November 3, 2000, 00:32

Nemo - The German sites have the most recent screenshots, and many are from the later time periods. There's even a cool hover bike!

I think they are the most recent because the radar screen uses coloured icons instead of buttons.

Monkey · November 3, 2000, 03:15

quote:

Originally posted by Slax on 11-02-2000 11:32 PM
Nemo - The German sites have the most recent screenshots, and many are from the later time periods. There's even a cool hover bike!

I think they are the most recent because the radar screen uses coloured icons instead of buttons.

what german site??!! Where? Where? Must have CTP2 screenshots now.... !!!!!

As for the previews, I seriously doubt any one of them having more than an hour of beta playing before it was on to the keyboards to type up the previews.

Maccabee2 · November 6, 2000, 18:00

Monkey, thanks for the insight about how much playtime the previewers actually do. I always suspected that the shallowness of their reviews reflected the depth of their interest and time investment. That's why I always wait for players' reviews.