Now, if YOU were the Firaxis PR person...

[korn469]

concerns that we can do very little about. in fact they only thing we can do is ask for explanations....
and that doesnt validate lots of shouting and hysteria

well while we might be able to do very little, i don't think that we have been shouting, instead we have just been stating our take on things, and as far as i know the only member who logged on from firaxis was Mike and i doubt he read all of the threads, probably just skimmed over a couple

without a little bit of debate this forum wouldn't be very popular, and I don't think that the majority of us on either side have made personal attacks, or said things that were uncalled for...i think the debate over MP, and if it is the final sign that civ3 is being rushed out the door is a fierce but friendly debate

you do a good job markos and you have a great site

[yin26]

Markos does an oustanding job and has an outstanding site. One hallmark of that, for example, is the moment ANYTHING goes wrong with the site, he and Dan are posting solid explanations. I might I remind us...this site is free to us.

And yet, in the face of a company that plans to charge quite a bit of money for its product, Markos doesn't demand the same level of service that he gives to his 'customers' for free!

Markos: If Firaxis ran its PR like you maintain Poly, I bet my major organs they'd sell a heck of a whole lot more games.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by yin26
Markos: Do you or do you not do everything in your power to make the developer look good? C'mon. This is not an attack on you. Be honest with yourself.

when you're making such baseless statements against me yin, you ARE attacking me, whether you want it or not.

You say you don't care about PR: Then why have a website?

i didnt say i didnt care about having good PR. i said i would judge firaxis by it's games, not it's PR

[MarkG]

Originally posted by korn469
well while we might be able to do very little, i don't think that we have been shouting, instead we have just been stating our take on things, and as far as i know the only member who logged on from firaxis was Mike and i doubt he read all of the threads, probably just skimmed over a couple

whe i talk about shouting and hysteria, i'm not referring to reasonable debate or people making posts with actual arguments like you korn

[yin26]

We cross-posted. Read above.

Baseless? Markos: Ask around what people think of your relationship with developers. You are FAMOUS for looking the other way and shining only a good light. Again, that might actually be to our benefit since you and Dan own this site. Face it...you are FAMOUS for it.

As for judging by the game and not the PR: Of course! But what do you think we have during the two years of waiting? We have PR, Markos. PR. And I promise you, many many people will judge whether or not to buy this game based on people's word of mouth even before the release. And that is based on what?

PR

[MarkG]

Originally posted by yin26
And yet, in the face of a company that plans to charge quite a bit of money for its product, Markos doesn't demand the same level of service that he gives to his 'customers' for free!

the service of that company is it's product(the games) and the support for the games(patches, bugs/troubleshooting)

PR is mainly a tool to promote their service

Markos: If Firaxis ran its PR like you maintain Poly, I bet my major organs they'd sell a heck of a whole lot more games.

probable, but that's a bit irrelevant to the quality of their service

[yin26]

So you agree with better PR they'd sell more games. And yet:

that's a bit irrelevant to the quality of their service

MARKOS!!! More money won't allow them to provide a better service in the future???!!!

[MarkG]

Originally posted by yin26
Baseless? Markos: Ask around what people think of your relationship with developers. You are FAMOUS for looking the other way and shining only a good light. Again, that might actually be to our benefit since you and Dan own this site. Face it...you are FAMOUS for it.

being "famous" for something is one thing. being that thing is something else, right?

since you're not giving any examples and you're judging me based on what i'm "famous" of, i'll give you one

this is the news on the lack of a demo for civ3, written by me. please tell me how i'm "looking the other way" and how i'm "finding excuses" for firaxis

NO CIV3 DEMO!

Initially posted by Darkknight in the forums, Firaxis just now confirmed it to us.

There are no plans to for a Civilization 3 demo, either before or after the release.

This comes as a contradition to Firaxis' history, who had demos for all it's games up to now. Infogrames has had demos for most of the games it has published as well.

Of course there is a minority of people who didnt care for a demo... The only thing that is left now is to discuss this in the forums...

[korn469]

You are FAMOUS for looking the other way and shining only a good light. Again, that might actually be to our benefit since you and Dan own this site. Face it...you are FAMOUS for it.

Markos

that's just yin's way of inviting you to join in all of the negative speculation and kick the developer while their down games we enjoy so much

[MarkG]

Originally posted by yin26
MARKOS!!! More money won't allow them to provide a better service in the future???!!!

well, with the current PR they were able to make some pretty good games, didnt they?

[yin26]

First, let me be clear: I think as the owner of this site, gaming companies need to know without even thinking twice: 'Hey, Markos and Dan will give it their best shot to promote us.' I think that is good, and I think it is necessary. Leave the criticism to freaks like me.

I remember that post very well and was actually quite pleased that at least you said:

"This comes as a contradition to Firaxis' history."

Not exactly a scathing comment...not exactly saying 'It's hard to imagine how they could have made this decision' or anything, but it was probably about as close as you could say. It was a fact, after all, and not commentary.

This is a contradition to Firaxis' history. True. But what are the implications? That's where it gets interesting...and that's where you start looking at things only in the positive way. See what I am saying?

As for other examples, I don't have the time or interest to go back through 2 years of CtP posts...but it's all there. If you have EVER criticised Activision for the way it handled CtP, please show me so I can stop this line of argument with you since it's not really that important. Don't show me a post that says:

"As of today, we have confirmation that Activision will no longer patch CtP."

That's just posting news. Show me something with editorial:

"And after all this site has done to help the Activision team, I can only express regret and sadness that the fans have been left to try to fix a game that is still broken in many important ways."

But I doubt you'd ever say that: Why? Because you'd welcome Activision back in a minute if they started on CtP 3.

Finally, if you recall FoA4, I said you were 'fair' in that you don't go closing down other people's criticism if it isn't using bad language or a repeat of another thread or something. That's all I can ask of you, really, and you do that very well.

[yin26]

pretty good games: Yes.

Better games?

I think it will take better PR.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by yin26
Not exactly a scathing comment...not exactly saying 'It's hard to imagine how they could have made this decision' or anything, but it was probably about as close as you could say. It was a fact, after all, and not commentary.

This is a contradition to Firaxis' history. True. But what are the implications? That's where it gets interesting...and that's where you start looking at things only in the positive way. See what I am saying?

where do i stat looking things in only the positive way?

i'm writing the news yin, i give the facts. i'm not going to give your brain food ready for consumption

Show me something with editorial

if you want something editorial, see this
http://apolyton.net/misc/column/150_goodbye.shtml

i'm sorry if i dont express "regret" and "sadness" for how the activision managment handled things. i dont feel this way

But I doubt you'd ever say that: Why? Because you'd welcome Activision back in a minute if they started on CtP 3.

are you saying that as a site owner of the bigest site for civ games i should not welcome a big company who wants to make a civ game?

That's all I can ask of you, really, and you do that very well.

for a moment i thought you expected me to start a crusade to hang the firaxis pr people

[LaRusso]

yin, cmon 'moderator' does imply being moderate, doesn't it? i feel that the debate on mp will end like the debate on graphics and roads over mountains....one day a screenshot appeared and everyone forgot about it.

[korn469]

i feel that the debate on mp will end like the debate on graphics and roads over mountains

hopefully it will turn out not to be true! i wouldn't mind if it was just a hoax

[LaRusso]

hm, how authentic IS that email exchange?

[yin26]

Markos:

I've said this a million times, and I'll keep saying it: You have a great site and put a hell of a lot of work into it. End of story.

I'm just glad that we both agree that better PR from Firaxis 'probably' would lead to a lot more money being made, thereby allowing them to invest in even better games in the future.

Believe it or not, I would like to see that happen...

[MarkG]

Originally posted by yin26
I've said this a million times, and I'll keep saying it: You have a great site and put a hell of a lot of work into it. End of story.

i thank you but i never said i didnt believe you or anything like that

i just dont like any kind of implications regarding my creditability in the way i do things on this site...

[yin26]

Let's put it this way:

1) You own the site and need to give the developers every good chance to prove themselves.

2) I am just a lowly fan and feel the need to make sure that 'fan issues' are being taken seriously by the developer.

[MarkG]

no fan deserves to be characterizated "lowly" yin

[yin26]

Wow. Even Yin? This is a touching display of PR, Markos. Take note, Firaxis!

[jglidewell]

Originally posted by Pembleton
Firaxis doesn't have to worry about PR. It's going to sell loads based on at least the following factors:

1) Getting press in Time and NY Times. Even Starcraft and Diablo never got this.
2) Sid Meier's reputation. Why else do they keep putting his name on games?
3) Civ2 is considered the best game of all time by most reviewing sites or magazines. If not they put it in their top 5.
4) Civ2 was a bestseller as well as the original Civ. The projected audience is not just the serious gamers like us, but the "casual" gamers and people who don't even know what HTML means. I have a couple friends who have only played a handful of computer games, such as Myst. Their favorites are Civilization.

Look at CTP. The first one was a bestseller for a while because of its name. Civilization: Call To Power. It didn't matter that the game really sucked, it still continued to sell well even after people started returning it. When the Civ name was dropped after the lawsuit and it was just Call To Power 2, no-one bought it. Activision realized this and stopped supporting it after 1 patch.

And guess what the "masses" who play Civ play? SP.

My gosh I have Pembleton Dittobumps all over me!!!!!!
TT TT
Di o Di o.

[yin26]

Yes, but can the Sid cow be milked forever on name alone? It's not the 80's or mid 90's anymore. Juuuust a few more names in programming/game design have popped up since then. The day of locking one's self in a closet and zip-locking your 5.25 a few months later are over.

Not looking for every edge you can get in this market is the kiss of death.

[Leonidas]

When I read through the threads on this site I don't see shouting or hysteria. What I see is a group of dedicated fans that have put in a great deal of time and effort in their attempts to mold CivIII into a game they can both be proud of and enjoy for a long time to come.

While CivIII will still be a great game (I have no doubt on this point), the rush to deadline and the elimination of certain aspects of the game, means that it will not be what it potentially could have become. This I think, is the whole key to the debate.

There are things that we know will not be in the game. But what other shortcuts have been taken that we don't know about?

The debate about MP is the not issue. The issue really is the fact that shortcuts are being taken in this game. That is sad. I would have expected this from any other game except CivIII.

But alas poor Civ, I knew it well. Whether it be nobler in the heart to buy the Special Edition or wait for the reviews, that is the question. . .

[jglidewell]

Yin, I have a question?

If you can remember that far back,

The first time you had CIV I in your hands. Did you worry about MP? Did you worry about the Graphics? Did you worry about playability? Did you worry that it was not in developement long enough? Did you worry about anything?

[yin26]

jglidewell: Well, I was, relatively speaking, a kid (I'm 30 now). I was still amazed by any kind of decent graphics on a screen...even if they were criticized for their time as "looking like EGA graphics." I had never seen a game like it. Do you know some people never even knew that was a wagon blinking on the screen? I knew that much. From there, it was discovery...glorious discovery. I must have read the manual 20 times, just for fun if anything else.

I never saw a Civ 1 website. I never cared. It was a solitary experience, and everything I ever found out about Civ 1, I found out myself. It was a simple time. My expectations were low...but raised a huge step after Civ 1, to be sure.

But now, these many years later, I have played Civ 1 and 2 to death. I have played cutting edge games both in terms of graphics and execution. I have seen plenty of games like Civ since then, most not as good, but many quite similar.

I have seen a thousand websites, maybe more. Now, most times, the games I play are part of a community in one way or another. And that community affects my enjoyment of the game...positively or negatively. Things are more complicated now. My expectations are much higher...and for Civ 3 to even maintain the status quo would take a huge effort.

In terms of many of the things I have outlined, that effort so far, at least as far as Firaxis has shown us, has been less than stellar. "Pretty good," as Markos said? Yes. A leader in the field? A game that will match the magic of Civ 1 in modern terms? Clearly, I have concerns.

The Net has brought out the worst and absolute best in gaming. Firaxis, however, still seems to think the Net is a relatively minor concern.

[mactbone]

The Net has brought out the worst and absolute best in gaming. Firaxis, however, still seems to think the Net is a relatively minor concern.

It IS a minor concern, at least if you think interms of compare and contrast. The average gamer I'm willing to bet will hardly ever go to a developer's website let alone a fansite. The best place to get the word out about your game is still print. A casual gamer or even a non-gamer may walk past a newstand and seeing a cover talk of "Civ, the latest and greatest" will start to think about the game. They may even pick up the magazine and flip around to look at pictures. Boom, Firaxis just added another potential customer. Plus, there are sites like Gamespot and Gamespy which look for the information we find here (they probably get most of their info from the Developer's site though). What I'm trying to say is that if it's not posted on their website, in a magazine (although there can be inaccuracies here as well), or Official Posts, I don't think Firaxis is sending a message to a broad audience. Therefore they can see the net as a small part of an ad campaign. With a name like Civ3 they could just ship it to stores w/o advertising and it would sell well.

[belinda9]

ok I'm just your average, lowly consumer.
I'm not a teenager anymore, and my discretionary income has alot more demands upon it. I'm also not what one would consider a hardcore gamer -- yeah, I got a few games I play, but I don't run out and spend 50 or 60 dollars a month buying new PC games.
Having said that, I will add that I buy related information (like PC Gaming, etc.) because I DO research what I buy instead of just going out and plunking down my hard-earned bucks to try something out.
So, I think it was a valid point made that Firaxis could well have addressed ALL the questions people might have had about their game while they were shilling it all over GenCon and E3 -- and nowhere in the press releases stemming from these efforts did I see any mention of MP capability present OR future. I don't think it's too much to ask not to have to "buy a pig in a poke" (to use an old expression). If they have valid reasons for developing a game and releasing it without MP capability, why can they not just say so up front? Personally, I don't think MP is something that works best as just "tacked onto" what is essentially setup from the original design point of view as a SP game; thus, if it's going to be a SP game that they might tack a MP patch on at some future date, might I not expect to know that at least before I have the opportunity to send them money to preorder the game? (which I could do even now,BTW)
These people should know their market -- yes, there are those who could care less about MP. But do they not have market research that shows a MP market? Is it not in their best interest to find out who likes what about existing games and address these markets?
So I come away with the bad taste in my mouth that, as a person who would rather spend my money and computer resources on a game designed as a multiplayer game, I am not important to them and they think I'll blindly run out and preorder a game based on the rosy projections of "great graphics". pfft.
No thanks.
As far as "riding on Sid Meier's name" goes; again, this is 2001. People under the age of 30 (which is, after all, probably their projected demographic) don't necessarily even know who Sid Meier is. Case in point -- the new SimGolf game Sid is involved in. As part of the promotion for this game, EA/Maxis posted a sim download of Sid Meier on their Sims webpage -- and the overwhelming response to that in _their_ forums was "Who is Sid Meier?"
ok, granted, that's sim-people and not civ-people, but you get my drift.
I just don't think I should _have_ to be able to cruise various forums to pick up bits and pieces of information and-or rumor about a game when they SHOULD just tell us what it is we're going to be able to buy from them. Is that so much to ask?
oh, and at least I'm glad I did finally get over to their website (www.civ3.com) to find out what I could as I notice by the system requirements that unless I want to fork over a grand or so to buy a new computer that I'm not going to be able to play their game in any case -- even if I couldn't find out _anything_ at that site about my original question.
One last bit of info. They DO have over at www.civ3.com, posted right on the front page, a link to askthecivteam questions about the game -- and promising to address selected questions in future updates of the site. So at least that's something. Guess I'll just have to keep an eye on that to see what, if, anything they have to say.

[jglidewell]

Originally posted by yin26
From there, it was discovery...glorious discovery. I must have read the manual 20 times, just for fun if anything else.

This is the highest expectation I have for civ iii. It might be unfair but it is what i would want every game 'sold' to deliver. IMO I have never seen a sequel as good as the original though. I didn't buy Civ ii for some years, it just seemed like the original to me. No 'discovery' just improvements which in hindsight could of been critizised for not being in civ i.

The discovery for me thus far for civ iii is the addition of culture, Will it really be part of the game? Will there be anything to explore there?

I too, feel things are being pushed from somewhere. Things such as 16 civs vs 8 civs are somewhat mystifying and gives suspicion that it is being rushed.

[Leonidas]

The internet a rare concern? Maybe.

But consider this: there are over 11,000 registered users for this forum alone. Add another 5 to 10,000 lurkers. They are able to see what this community says about a game. Bingo.

Whether the review is good or bad, word spreads like wildfire. Each of those persons above (approximately 20,000) each know at least 3 to 4 other people or more. Add other forums, more people, etc and you can see the impact the net can make.

For example, look at the release of CTP2. This forum castigated it. The result? Only about 30 to 40,000 copies were sold.

While the average gamer may be sucked into buying any game that is released on store shelves - eventually, even THEY will learn to READ reviews before buying another game.

If you hit the dumbest animal on the head long enough, eventually, even it learns to step out of the way. . .

What was it that Lincoln said? "You can fool some of the people some of the time. You can even fool some of the people all of the time. But you will never fool all of the people all of the time."

Game companies need to take this lesson to heart. . .