If Blizzard can do it why can't Firaxis?

[korn469]

Here is a quote off of the battle.net website

Warcraft III update - 07/23/2001
Over the past few weeks, it has become apparent that Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos will not be complete for release by the end of 2001. Our development team is hard at work finalizing the product and we look forward to bringing you an outstanding, real-time strategy game in 2002.
Our goal at Blizzard is to make the best games possible. This means that we will not release a game until it's ready. While we could release an inferior product to meet a specific date, we instead choose to polish our games until they meet the superior quality that we know Blizzard gamers and our development teams expect.

We firmly believe that this additional development time will prove invaluable, ensuring that Warcraft III will expand upon the legendary gameplay experience previously found in the critically acclaimed Warcraft series.

Announcements regarding further details and specifics of the Warcraft III beta test will be released in the near future. We encourage you to check our official website at www.blizzard.com for updates, and as always, we thank you for your continued support.

Blizzard Entertainment

It sounds like from the announcement that they could ship it and patch it later, and with Blizzard's reputation and the legions of rabid warcraft fans (myself included), still make a killing. However Blizzard refuses to do this. They are screwing the most important time of the year, the Christmas shopping season because they want WC3 to be the best warcraft ever.

Now if Civ3 is ready to ship in time for Christmas, that's great, but if it could still use some more development time, then Sid himself should go to bat for firaxis and ask the suits for some more time and money. If civ3 is done right then any delay will be made up in the increased sales from an instant classic. Rushing a game out the door almost always hurts the long term prospects of that game. If the CtP2 team had gotten more development time and more support from activision then maybe it would have sold more than what something like 34,000 copies.

Jeffrey Morris himself said that a completely bugless game is a myth, and I agree with him on that. However, a game free of any showstopping bugs is not a myth. I recently bought Emperor: Battle for Dune, and it was very polished. It didn't have any major bugs, and I have had it for over a month and still haven't experianced a crash with it. Did I mention that I had the absolute minimum specs to run the game? It actually runs fine on my system, sometimes in huge battles it experiances a slow down but for the most part it runs good on my system.

Civ3 can be the best civ or for that matter the best TBS game ever, but for that to happen the team at firaxis is going to have to make some very tough choices. One of the biggest choices facing them is when are they going to release civ3? I'm sure they could probably have the game out in two weeks from now if they wanted to, but that it would just be buggy beta code.

There is a huge difference between a great game and a good game, a good game might just have great game play, whereas a great game will have great game play and all of those small nuances and small touches that sets it apart.

For a civ2 fanatic I'm sure that two things are going to happen. First thing is they are going to complain about how civ3 is good but doesn't measure up to the perfection of civ2. The second thing is that they are going to buy civ3 on the first day it comes out in stores (that is if they haven't already preordered it). But these people don't really count. All of us here are completely biased.

There are probably four thousand people here at Apolyton who are regulars...out of these four thousand people we probably have more Civ, Civ2, SMAC, CtP, C:ToT, and CtP2 experiance than any other group of four thousand people you could assemble. We are a precious resource that firaxis should value, because we probably know everything there is to know about civ. However, we are so biased that I think Firaxis has written us off. We demand excellence but I am sure all of us (including Yin) will buy civ3 at some point or other. Hell most of us have already devoted hundred of hours to civ3 as it is.

We have one demand here at Apolyton, and that is that Civ3 is the best civ experiance ever! We are already in firaxis's corner for the most part, because we are going to buy civ3, so firaxis doesn't have to satisfy every single little whim we beg, plead, and cry for. But trust us firaxis, the better you make civ3 the the more it will sell, and the better it is the longer it will last.

Everything you improve will convince one more player to get the game. Everything you leave unfinished or buggy will convince one more player not to buy the game. Forget the holiday push, just work on civ3 till you agree it is the best civ experiance ever, and then release it...even if it means you have to wait till 2002. That is all we ask, and if you think about it, it really is good advice that will help you years down the road when civ3 is still selling. We have faith in civ3, please don't let your fans down because of pressure from accountants...if Blizzard can shug off the holiday season and wait till Warcraft 3 is ready then hopefully Firaxis can do the same with Civ3.

I hope Civ3 is ready when the game plays excellently with all of the new concepts tightly intergrated into the game, and when it is free of any major bugs, and has the best civ AI yet (one that can win at least 1 out of 3 games against a good player on the hardest level). My worst fear is that Civ3 will be ready when the malls open the day after thanksgiving for the begining of the holiday season.

[SerapisIV]

Originally posted by korn469
We have one demand here at Apolyton, and that is that Civ3 is the best civ experiance ever!...Forget the holiday push, just work on civ3 till you agree it is the best civ experiance ever, and then release it...even if it means you have to wait till 2002...I hope Civ3 is ready when the game plays excellently with all of the new concepts tightly intergrated into the game, and when it is free of any major bugs, and has the best civ AI yet (one that can win at least 1 out of 3 games against a good player on the hardest level). My worst fear is that Civ3 will be ready when the malls open the day after thanksgiving for the begining of the holiday season.

Absolutely...most importent is the bolded part

[death_head]

I agree wholeheartedly. Once a game series has reached critical mass (defined as the popularity point where the game will be a hit no matter how bad it is), the developers can wait until they are completely ready.

Yknow what, Screw this, Screw waiting for it, Screw knowing all about it, Screw complaining about it, Screw encouraging them. I'm going, I don't want to read one damn article on the net about Civ3.

If I walk into the stores one day, and I see it on the shelf, I'll buy it. It's as damn well simple as that.

I followed Black and White damn closely. I became the tattoo designer, I talked to the crew many times. In the end, I screwed up the whole game for myself. I was waiting for something that I ruined myself. All the games that fell out of the air turned out to be my favourite games of all time. My uncle would come over with Monkey Island, boy I can still remember it. "Money Island? wow that sounds fun!" I played it, hooked for life, happiest little boy in the world. Now all I do is complain that the game makers did a crappy job, spent too long, yada yada. Screw it. Being here, doing this, I REALLY am a contradiction and probably a hypocrit too.

If any of you want this game to be good, I suggest you follow me and do the same.

Ciao all.

ContradictioN

[death_head]

Alternatively, you can be like me and never buy it and probably never play it...I guess I'm a hopeless science fiction/SMAC fanatic.

[korn469]

ContradictioN

i don't see how knowing about the game and being part of the Black and White community ruined it for you. I think alot of the game is in flux and that the gaming press does little to remind a player that all of the things they see in a preview might change by the time the game goes gold...but I personally like knowing where civ3 is at in it's development process...not because it's going to really make my life any better...it won't...it's just a fun little distraction for me it's a hobby

And as they make civ3 better they make my hobby better...i'm going to buy civ3, i am also going to buy warcraft 3...so far this year i have bought a bunch of games and i will do the same next year too...so if civ3 sucks, it's not going to ruin my life

but if civ3 is great it might slightly enhance some little part of my life...the civ series has let me come in contact with a great number of intelligent and often quite quirky people...

so far i have been a thread administrator for the original list, i have oversaw the Essential Civ3 list with raingoon, and i have mad hundreds of posts about civ3...when civ3 ships i am going to try to organize a group of Apolyton bug hunters to make a civ3 bug list, and to make an Essential Civ3 Expansion list...i do this because i think it is fun...i like doing my part...Will Wright said that with the Sims he has found that 2% of the fans entertain 98% of them. I want to be in that 2%.

Out of all of the information we have most of it is useless until we get our grimy little paws on civ3 and abuse it we won't know what works or what doesn't...but i personally am neither tired of getting civ3 news, nor completely frustrated at the lack of official firaxis updates

All I know is that I have a huge amount of respect for Blizzard because they refuse to release anything less than an A quality title, Starcraft is still on the charts, and Diablo 2 is still a force (besides the Sims which is almost unexplicable in terms of success) outselling many new titles. All of this success has came at a price, Blizzard has always given up short term gain in favor of long term success, and I hope that firaxis follows in Blizzard's footsteps. I am a fan, and I just hope that the quality of the product overshadows the short term bottom line at Firaxis. That is all I can hope for...even if civ3 gets released in October I'm positive that it will be many times better than Civ2 and after a patch or so it will be a great game if not a classic. I just think though that the more time Firaxis spends on Civ3 the less initial frustration at bugs and glitches, and the more developed the gameplay is going to be. Maybe I'm crazy for thinking that...but either way I want civ3 to do well, and I think we're safe in saying that even if civ3 has many flaws it will still sell better than SMAC, which Firaxis said they considered to be a hit. So with such an eagerly awaited title Firaxis should have some leeway on the time they can spend working on Civ3 and hopefully they will spend as much time as possible.

The better it is the more it will sell.

p.s. I also hope this thread doesn't break down and became something like "If Blizzard can do it why can't Firaxis? Because they are (insert explitive here)!"
That doesn't help anything...

[Inverse Icarus]

blizzard is, IMO, a better, more established entity than Firaxis is.

blizzard has released major hits, and was never afraid to spend EXCESSIVE amounts of time on it.

all their newest games, Starcraft, Diablo II, and now WC3, have been delayed (Starcraft for over a year).

if firaxis gives me a good reason for a delay, i will accept it. mind you i will still curse and whine, but i will accept it.

a BETA could help you know.

[death_head]

Blizzard was incredibly wise to release betas of all their games after Warcraft II. It ensured that the game was balanced, appropriately difficult, and fun. However, they did this mainly because Warcraft II had so many issues.

Civ2, on the other hand, is considered almost perfect. Firaxis knows what needs to be improved from feedback. How is a beta going to help? A community like this would literally tear it apart and argue about everything. Note: I really love this community and consider it (tearing apart) a good thing in most cases, but not here.

[yin26]

Korn: Great thread! The paradox here is that as a small company they seem to think working on two games will diversify their risks. If you ask me, it has boxed them in. Well, they missed their window for a Christmas release for SMAC. Of course, if they do that for Civ 3, I doubt they'll have the saavy to make it a solid news item that actually reflects well on them.

In the end, I screwed up the whole game for myself. I was waiting for something that I ruined myself. All the games that fell out of the air turned out to be my favourite games of all time.

I know what he means. You can get so wrapped up in a game before it ever comes that it has little or no hope of matching expectations. Anyway, he'll be back. He's a junky! (like me)

[Imran Siddiqui]

Um... Firaxis HAS done it before

Witness Evidence A: SMAC... pushed back at least twice...

[Warm Beer]

Originally posted by death_head

Civ2, on the other hand, is considered almost perfect. Firaxis knows what needs to be improved from feedback. How is a beta going to help? A community like this would literally tear it apart and argue about everything. Note: I really love this community and consider it (tearing apart) a good thing in most cases, but not here.

Excellent point... In fact, I need to say that again: Excellent point. Although this is my favorite Civ site (I've lurked for years ) and there are many good ideas seen on this forum, we can get a bit... hmmm, "over-zealous" may be the right word. It seems among most of the excellent suggestions, very little concensus can be reached, which should be attrubuted to the excellence of the Civ series: there is a bit of something for everyone.

As far a pushing back the game's official release date, we should probably wait untill an offcial date is chosen first. Call me crazy .

[Case]

Don't forget that Civ2 contained some serious bugs - Microprose had to issue patches to fix the unit stats and allow players to create their own tech's and units.

[tniem]

Right on korn469. Exactly what I have thought all along.

The reason Blizzard has succeeded is they looked at the long picture. We have had success with WarCraft I and II. Now we are making Diablo. We could release it and patch or we can make it the best game ever. Likewise, StarCraft was originally an improvement in graphics over WarCraft, they went back and made it one of the most successful games of all time. They keep going back until it is as near perfect as they can make it.

Now, I will buy any Blizzard product because I know it will be the best game that could possibly made with that subject.

It is the same way with Maxis. They have delayed games. They have significantly changed entire engines for a game just to make it better. SimCity3000 was supposed to be fully 3D and allow you to walk your towns streets. They were not going to be able to pull it off in a fun way so they started again. And it of course selled very well.

Make a game great and it will sell.


As for you organizing the Apolyton Bug Hunters, best of luck. I hope I can contribute when the time comes.

[korn469]

tniem

i think we all agree that a great game will sell and sell and sell, and that unfinished buggy game...even if it's a diamond in the rough will fail and fail and fail

firaxis has all the talent they need to make a great game, this isn't their first game and i think they have a solid team organized by now...

but need i remind any of you here that civ3 has already went through one lead designer (btw what's up with Brian and company?) however hopefully all of that is in the past, and things have been running smoothly over at hunt valley since then

one thing that blows my minds about blizzard is that they released a balance patch for starcraft THIS YEAR! not only did it rebalance the game it also added in two completely new features, the ability to fight on the same team as the AI, and the ability to record and replay the game. I mean maybe those things aren't the most complex items ever to add to a game, but how many other companies would take the time to patch a game that came out in the spring of 1998?

as for the apolyton bug hunters we owe it to ourselves and to firaxis...we have already *****ed about civ3 so much that i'm sure firaxis (especially Dan) could kick everyone of our butts

if only thirty people get involved, and it take two people to find and properly recreate one bug that is 15 bugs...15 things that won't be around to ruin our enjoyment of civ3...

all i'm asking is that if people could just donate like maybe one or two hours a week for just a month that could be possibly hundreds if not thousands of hours spent by the community to find and reproduce bugs...all of that time free to firaxis...by alot of people who know just as much about civ as any QA person they could hire

then at the end of each week we could send firaxis a list we have complied of all of the bugs, with save games and descriptions of the bugs...just a few minutes each day generating a save game to verify a bug, that is all it would take to make civ3 that much better...and there are enough of us here if we got involved so that the strain on any one person wouldn't be more than they could handle while at the same time we improve the game

hell markos and Dan could even award a special title to the person who finds and verifies the most bugs...they could become the official

The Apolyton Big Bug Hunter

how does that sound?

[LaRusso]

Well, quality comes from excessive amounts of beta testing. Internet is a great tool do quickly find testers and collect a massive input on bugs and gameplay in shortest time possible.
Why Firaxis are not planning to do so is still anybody's guess. It might be that it's not beta yet, it might be that they do NOT want open beta. That is really a shame, IMHO there is no quality control like 1000 apolytoners feeding you with 500+ comments weekly on bugs and gameplay.
But then again, it is them who think they know the business better....come to think of it, they probably do.

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by Case
Don't forget that Civ2 contained some serious bugs - Microprose had to issue patches to fix the unit stats and allow players to create their own tech's and units.

Civ II had to be patched, it is true, but the 1 player game played perfectly and stayed stable right out of the box for most if not all players. That is the sign of good testing. Tweaking a point off attack or adding a point on defence is minor stuff. That the customisation tool was less well tested is a pain, but forgivable. You should be playing the basic game for a couple of months before reaching for the custom tools! Now that multiplayer and mods are the norm rather than the exception we ought to be able to expect the same level of rigorous testing to be applied to those elements of the game before release, and I'm sure they know this. The reviewers will certainly focus far more on those elements than they did 5 years ago.

I don't want the game to be released any later than it has to be, but adverts or no adverts, if it comes out in October/November I will be worried they have succumbed to the temptation to rush it.

[Hasdrubal]

The odd bug wouldn't bug me. As long as the bugs don't render the game unplayable in a ToT-fashion , I'm fine with them. We can track them down. How could a bughunt by a handfull of programmers possibly compare with what this crowd of hundreds can and will find? If the company were to release a bug-free game, that would only mean that they have wasted their valuable time. Firaxis shouldn't waste their time on bughunting, they should devote their effort to play-testing. And more testing, improving, playing and fine-tuning until they get it just right.
On a side note: I hope that they will keep the financial controller at bay by telling him that it is the creative team that makes or breaks a company, and not the sticking to any tight schedules or release dates.

[death_head]

Originally posted by Hasdrubal
The odd bug wouldn't bug me.

Bad pun alert!

[Swissy]

The situation at Blizzard is quite different than Firaxis'. Blizard is a Publisher/developer, they do everything in-house, they control the money. Firaxis is a Developer, they have no money. They have been given a contract to produce a product, which probably has a timelimit atached. They do not produce the product within a specified amount of time there are probable contractual remedies; LESS MONEY at pay-off time.

Some of the best software comes from companies that keep everything in-house, but only if they are in great finanical health. Blizzard did not always hold product until they were nearly perfect. Now with three great series under their belt they can do so. Firaxis on the other hand, is dependent on outside sources for their funding. Could it be that Sid Golf was necessary to keep Firaxis financially sound until the Civ3 pay-off? The Sim franchise is EA's and Firaxis has a long relationship with EA(SMAC and Sid's Cival War stuff). I think Civ3 is the first time Firaxis has developed a game for anyone but EA.

So don't compare Blizzard to Firaxis, nor should you expect Firaxis to act the way Blizzard does. They are two companies that are on the opposite ends of the software industry spectrum; ones that completely hold their fate in their hands, and those beholden to others.

[korn469]

The situation at Blizzard is quite different than Firaxis'. Blizard is a Publisher/developer, they do everything in-house, they control the money. Firaxis is a Developer, they have no money. They have been given a contract to produce a product, which probably has a timelimit atached. They do not produce the product within a specified amount of time there are probable contractual remedies; LESS MONEY at pay-off time.

Swissy this is untrue...as far as i know and please feel free to correct me if i am wrong...Blizzard used to be (or were they just a part of?) Davidson & Associates, which was in turn bought by the french corporation Havas Interactive Inc., which also bought Sierra...which was owned by Universal? (is Havas now called Vivendi Universal Publishing?) i think that is correct, but i'm not exactly sure. Is that correct? So if you had of said Havas controls the money...because since Blizzard Entertainment is a wholly owned subsiderary of Havas Interactive, Havas controls the purse strings...if they wanted to Havas could lay off the entire Blizzard staff...Havas is a large corporation and more than likely a public company in France so when it comes right down to it the CEO controls the money outflows at Havas (of which Blizzard is a part) and the CEO is controlled by investors in Havas, who put their money in that company to make money

Jeff Briggs is CEO of Firaxis games and he also happens to the executive producer of civ3...Firaxis is not a public company (i think it is a partnership if i remember correctly) so if Jeff Briggs wanted to say...hey we will take a short term hit in profits for the long term benefit of the company, because a well done civ3 will sell many more copies than a shoddy civ3 that we rushed out the door to make an artificial limit...then nobody could fire Jeff Briggs...

As for their contract we don't know what it says and i can guarantee than nobody from firaxis is going to post it here...I would also go to say that with all of Jeff and Sid's years in the gaming business that they probably know how to negociate a contract that won't screw them over, and I would also go as far as to say that when it comes to Civ3 that the words Sid Meier's Civ III are worth a great deal more than Wes Berggren's Civ III (btw Wes is Tripping Daisy's guitar player)...i will also conjecture that Sid and Jeff knew this and this gave them a great deal of leeway in contract negociations...so the entire time table might come down to what Jeff Briggs decides

Some of the best software comes from companies that keep everything in-house, but only if they are in great finanical health. Blizzard did not always hold product until they were nearly perfect. Now with three great series under their belt they can do so. Firaxis on the other hand, is dependent on outside sources for their funding. Could it be that Sid Golf was necessary to keep Firaxis financially sound until the Civ3 pay-off? The Sim franchise is EA's and Firaxis has a long relationship with EA(SMAC and Sid's Cival War stuff). I think Civ3 is the first time Firaxis has developed a game for anyone but EA.

Blizzard has became financially sound by making great software not the other way around...if the balance sheet of a company determined the quality of it's games then i wish that Texaco, or BP, or Shell would start making games, because they have been doing pretty good since oil prices have been on the rise...alot of good games and great ideas have died because of funding problems at game developers (or when a publisher just decides to cancle an inhouse project like they did at Origin, with ultima sequal Origin...that seemed like a sure thing right?) I'm sure that Blizzard wasn't as well off finacially when they decided to hold off on starcraft as what they are now that they are holding off on warcraft3...but they still decided to push back it's release date by almost a year, and they produced quite possibly the best RTS game ever...Firaxis and Blizzard are both dependent on one thing and that is how many people buy their games...no matter what critics think, if WC3 doesn't sell, and neither does SC2, or D3 then blizzard will cease to exist...if civ3 sells 100 million copies (which it won't) then i am positive that firaxis will continue to stay in business

Could it be that Simgolf or any other EA title was required to fulfill firaxis's contract with EA...no matter what yin says about firaxis taking too much onto their plate i think basically to fulfill their contractual obligations to EA firaxis has to release a game for them and do it soon (also that contract was signed before firaxis had sold a single game, and i don't think they had as much leverage as they did with the civ3 contract) the reason that firaxis is making two games is that they have an obligation to EA to make another game for them and the chance at getting Civ3 was too good to pass up...if firaxis had of turned it down, maybe the developers who made CtP would have pitched a proposal at Infograms for civ3, so either Sid and company take Civ3 or somebody else gets it...

so firaxis took it...firaxis starts work on the abortive Dinosaurs project to fulfill their contract requirements to EA, it isn't working out...one day Sid and his good friend Will Wright are out on the golf course...they are talking about the pressures of their jobs, and Sid tells Will that the Dino's project is in trouble, that it isn't going to be up to Sid's standards and he is worried because EA is breathing down his neck...then him and Will come up with an idea that cashes in on both Sid and the Sim name at once, Sid Meier's Simgolf...it should be a fairly simple and straight forward game that should be easy to make, Will promises he will help Sid out in any way he needs, Sid like the idea, and decides he is going to bring a couple fresh ideas to both building games and golf games...Jeff Briggs and Jeff Morris who are considered to be the firaxis swat team (cuz they get results, plus Jeff can fire you if you aren't ready for crunch time )get assigned to Civ3 to make it work after Brian gets burnt out on making TBS games...Chris Pine gets a promotion and all of the best people (besides Sid who still plays Civ3 and tell the civ3 team if it's fun or not) get put on civ3...the less experianced people (not the worse people, just the ones who haven't already jelled into a high stress team yet) get put on Simgolf...firaxis suddenly is making two games, both of which could be hits

So don't compare Blizzard to Firaxis, nor should you expect Firaxis to act the way Blizzard does. They are two companies that are on the opposite ends of the software industry spectrum; ones that completely hold their fate in their hands, and those beholden to others.

i think it is more than fair to compare blizzard and firaxis...like the saying says, if you wanna be the best you gotta beat the best...i would say that blizzard is the best strategy game company out there and if firaxis wants that honor it's going to have to do the same thing...do i care if Sid makes 100,000 (or more) this year? no i dont i know Sid (and his family) cares but i don't...do i care if civ3 is best civ experaince ever...hell yes i care about that! i am a consumer and i want to consume the best products out there...however firaxis can laugh at me when they release a game that was rushed and unpolished because i will still (most likely) buy the game...however they won't be laughing when civ3 sells only (which is a relative term) 150k copies, especially when they were expecting 750k copies, because the game was rushed and people like me tell everyone to hold off and pick the game up if they find it in the bargin bin...firaxis and infograms make dramatically more money when they sell a game at 49.99 than when they sell the same game marked down to 19.99 (because they weren't moving)

as for the company that holds it's fate in their own hands, it is Firaxis...Jeff Briggs can do whatever he wants to, it is his company and he can run it how he sees fit...Rob Pardo, Max Schaefer and the rest of the crew at blizzard have to do what Havas Interactive, Inc. want them to...

so simply put...i think firaxis has full responsibility on the quality of Civ3...if Jeff Briggs decides to hold it back a month or so...it is his call...if Civ3 is rushed and shoddy then we can blame firaxis, and any thing they say will just be another lame excuse...if civ3 is a highly polished gem then we can thank firaxis, and nobody else can take credit for their accomplishment...that's what it comes down to...and i am counting on firaxis to make civ3 great

[yin26]

Blizzard has became financially sound by making great software not the other way around.

BRAVO! **wipes tears** Korn, you just saved me two months of posting on this topic. Do I have your permission to just hyper-link to that Manifesto as needed? Also, I hadn't considered that Sim Golf is a matter of meeting contractual agreements...hmmm.

[Rommel393]

the reason firaxis cant do it is because they cherish the casual gamer who will pick their game out of curiousity but toss their die hard civ players aside like so much cheap trash.

[korn469]

yin

i'm glad i saved you two months worth of posting...now maybe you can spend your time countering Rah's enthusiasm

hyperlink away...anyways once posted an idea becomes public domain anyways

and as for Simgolf i don't have any insider info, but i do remember reading somewhere that EA and firaxis signed a multigame deal, i know for a fact that infograms owns civ3, and that firaxis and infograms are the ones doing civ3...i also know for a fact that EA owns maxis and maxis owns (in this particular case) the Sim title, also sid was one of the special skins you could download from The Sims website, and that Will Wright and Sid have both been in the game business a long time and are probably friends...so putting things together that led me to the conclusion that firaxis to fulfill it's end of the contract with EA has to publish a title with EA fairly soon, the last title was Alien Crossfire, and it has been out a while (since either late 1999 or early 2k) so even if Simgolf comes out this year it will still have been over a year since firaxis has had a game distributed by EA...also the dino's game was going to be distributed by EA, because the firaxis-infogram deal is for civ3 only (if i have my facts straight) so it all makes sence...well at least in my way of thinking

Rommel393

i wouldn't say that firaxis tossed us aside like so much cheap trash...i do think that they have disreguarded most of the suggestions that we have sent to them, but i do think that they have listened to many of our suggestions...

but i think that games targeted toward the so called "causual gamer" need even more polish that games targeted toward the "hardcore gamer"

if eXcellent sofTware Corporation releases a game for a causual gamer on a console basically it CAN'T have any major bugs...it has to be highly polished...i know that nintendo and the other console makers have really stringent rules on QA...if they port that game from the console to the pc (which doesn't happen very much) and it now has bugs in it, the casual gamer isn't going to have the time or the patience to fool with it...downloading and unzipping a patch in the right place might be too much time and effort...

one of us hardcore gamers, will if need be go as far as downloading a patch...getting another program, hell maybe even editing the registry or irq settings, just to make the thing work...and even if it has bugs in it, but the game is great, we will play it...

so if u target a game right at the causual market...they are not going to take an entire night out just to download a 150mb patch...then to rewrite the rules.txt then to edit the registry and maybe put their network card on a different port to get the thing to work...they are either going to return it or never play it again...nobody complains when a game is finely tuned and with lots of polish

firaxis take the time to make civ3 the best civ experiance ever

[tniem]

Korn,

I posted the same thought about Dinos, in that the game was to fufil contract obligations.

I believe that Firaxis agreed to three games with EA. Which would be Gettysburg and SMAC. The third game being dinos/Sim Golf. Of course that would mean SMACX would not count as a game, only an add-on.

[Urban Ranger]

Amusing thread.

Somehow you people think that Firaxis is going to push Civ 3 out the door with tons of bugs in it? Why's that? Where's the evidence, or at least hints?


korn,

What great Blizzard software are you talking about? *scratchs head* Sorry, never heard of any.

[yin26]

Why's that? Where's the evidence, or at least hints?

1. Potential October release.
2. Assuming #1, the virtual lack of info so close to release.
3. Experience.

If Civ3 gets released in Q2 2002, though, all that pretty much goes away.

[MarkG]

the fact the firaxians have stated several times that there are no release dates and that a date should be ignored if it didnt came from them says nothing to yin of course....

[yin26]

It would mean something except that they have a publisher seemingly pushing a release date of October. While I have faith that Sid's name alone could push back the date, my worry isn't Firaxis on its own but the temptation to actually try to meet an insane deadline from a publisher thinking patches can cure everything.

[Warm Beer]

At the risk of sounding like a spammer, I must say, "Korn, that was the longest post I have ever read." (except, perhaps, if you count Yin's and Rah's 'reviews' of Civ3 and Father Beast's Parody in the same thread , but I digress...)

Not only was it long, it was quite informative, insightful and very succinct. Usually large posts put me to sleep (I know I ain't the only one)... but that was great, man. I should have commented on it earlier.

And regarding the 'rumored' October release date... A full page add in a gaming magazine looks quite official to me... either that, or it is irresponsible. At this point, neither one looks good.

[MarkG]

one one hand you have a publisher who MIGHT want to push for a certain date

on the other hand you have developer who you KNOW he wil push back the release if it is needed(the smac example)


and you choose the pessimistic and unbased possiblity....