You left the coop early and got your head chopped off

DarthVeda · October 31, 2001, 12:31

The reviewers, again, have shown that they aren't fit to poor pee out of a boot with the instructions written on the bottom.

Where's there's smoke there is fire, and I've smelled the same variety of smoke before with Call to Power.

I can already sense that Civ3 is a real stinker simply because the developers "just had" to make that deadline. Ship now, patch later. I've heard this before and I'm certainly fed up with the notion.

They even had a pre-existing engine to go from and they still couldn't deliver multiplayer OR decent scenario support! What the hell!

I saw this coming with CtP but was dumb enough to buy the game anyway! Activision corrected their errors in CtP2, but Firaxis simply repeated them all over again!

Why in the hell should I buy Civ3, when I'd be far better off waiting for Civ3: The Expansion that's going to come a year from now when the game is actually finished?!?!

Excuse me, but I'm pretty pissed off about this!

Steve Clark · October 31, 2001, 12:34

Alot of people, though, are having a great deal of fun playing the regular game right now.

Stuie · October 31, 2001, 12:53

Quote:

Originally posted by DarthVeda
I can already sense that Civ3 is a real stinker simply because the developers "just had" to make that deadline. Ship now, patch later. I've heard this before and I'm certainly fed up with the notion.

They even had a pre-existing engine to go from and they still couldn't deliver multiplayer OR decent scenario support! What the hell!

Glad to see your psychic powers are so well atuned. Why not try playing the game instead of coming around and being such a Yin. Or look at the reviews/impressions of the people from this forum who have been around for awhile.

As for your "pre-existing" engine comment, you're wrong. They have stated that they built the game from the ground up. Pre-exsiting concepts: YES. Pre-existing engine: NO.

I have found no glaring flaws in the game thus far, but I guess some people are only happy being negative. Oh, well; enjoy!

Boris Godunov · October 31, 2001, 13:32

Your Flatulence,

As a someone who has actually played the game, I can unequivocally state it is the best gaming purchase I've made in the last 2 years, easily. It is addictive and fun. There are some faults, but they pale next to the terrific aspects. My biggest beefs are minor compared to the fun I'm having.

For those who are jumping to conclusions--everyone who has played the game is giving it good reviews. Everyone. They have quibbles with this or that, but overall the reviews are vastly positive. Stop being whining pessimists when you're not even qualified to speak on it, since YOU HAVEN'T PLAYED IT YET.

hexagonian · October 31, 2001, 14:02

I gotta say that based on early reports, the game seems to be worth the purchase from a purely SP perspective. A lot of promising AI military/growth and action on the lower levels of difficulty, which was my main gauge to see how the game was working - and the fact that this action is not occuring due to verifiable cheats is good news. Granted, the difficulty on levels above Regent will be based on the AI cheats, but that was to be expected.

Most of the grumblings have been for minor issues, which more often than not, are preferencial in nature. No game will meet every expectation.

Now I have to wait until Christmas or my birthday to get the game...but I'm patient. This will also allow me to see how the game pans out once players have played several times and have had a chance to truly see game imbalances and exploitable flaws. These issues need repetitive playing to be revealed anyhow.

Too bad about the lack of Multiplay, Scenario Support, or provided Scenarios, though there are now rumbling that the Editor will be patched and not sold as an Expansion Pack, so there is still hope in this area. My main concern in this area relates to the ability to easily add new units/techs/wonders/place cities without jumping through a lot of hoops to do so. I have yet to see evidence that this is the case, though this will probably not affect whether I get the game.

techumseh · October 31, 2001, 14:03

Well I have. It's incomplete and unstable.

DarthVeda · October 31, 2001, 14:44

Maybe Infrogames could learn from a quality company like Blizzard or 3drealms and ship games when they are done. Some games actually have the quality and the name to sell themselves without the allure of the Christmas season.

Leonidas · October 31, 2001, 14:51

I agree with Techumseh and DarthVeda:

While the core game itself may be great; there are still a lot of features that were left out, and there are still many obvious bugs.

An early release of the game means paying full price for only a "partial" game.

Six months from now the "Gold" edition will probably include everything that should have been in this release, including the patches, MP, etc. . .

I expected this sort of thing from other games, but not with Civ 3. . .

klesh · October 31, 2001, 17:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
For those who are jumping to conclusions--everyone who has played the game is giving it good reviews. Everyone.

Uhhhh.... No. Certainly not true. Most unstable game I have bought for my pc in the last 2 years, actually.

-FMK.

General Ludd · October 31, 2001, 17:45

Quote:

Originally posted by DarthVeda
without the allure of the Christmas season.

Christmas early this year? It's still halloween, guy.

DarthVeda · October 31, 2001, 18:44

I mean in time for the chrismas season. And yes, here in the states it starts this early. You can find Christmas displays up in stores by early october.

If you live in the U.S. and are not a troglodyte, then you will have already noticed this fact.

CDN_Harbinger · October 31, 2001, 18:50

How soon we forget Test of Time...

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

Now, I realize that Infogrames/Firaxis had nothing to do with ToT, but it seems they liked the idea - from a truly business/economic/capitalist point of view.

I am enjoying the posts guys and gals, but I will save my $50 until next year when they likely release a boxed set that includes the original and the expansion(s) - like they did for Alpha Centauri and Alien Crossfire. That way I get the whole game, including multiplayer, editors, et cetera, for a fair price.

Just my humble opinion folks. May the ensuing slander begin!

(Obviously, I agree with Darth Veda.)

Alexander's Horse · October 31, 2001, 18:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Steve Clark
Alot of people, though, are having a great deal of fun playing the regular game right now.

I haven't seen anyone with a decent reputation as a player post a review yet. I consider the opinion of kindergarten players to be worthless.

We've seen all this "its great" hype before with CTP I and II. A bunhc of newbie idiots come in and say how good the game is and then we find out otherwise.

I wish these fools would stop posting reviews.

Case · October 31, 2001, 19:02

I agree with DV - I don't see why I should reward Firaxis for releasing an unfinished product.

Alexander's Horse · October 31, 2001, 19:06

The absence of multiplayer alone condemns them on the unfinished game point. This is a STANDARD FEATURE of TBS games.

CapTVK · October 31, 2001, 19:07

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse

I haven't seen anyone with a decent reputation as a player post a review yet. I consider the opinion of kindergarten players to be worthless.

I'm waiting till Ming and Rah have put this game through the wringer. I'm really surprised by the initial lack of scenario support.

Previously my attitude towards Civ3 was cordial/neutral

now it's close to neutral/icy...

Delthayre · October 31, 2001, 19:15

It plays fine for me, quite stable.

I really don't care about mp (to be honest this might be because I'm lousy at multi-player games for some reason).

If it was released early it might be the publisher (all to often it is, but I have no evidence to support this so take it with a pinch of salt).

Again, I remind people that patience is a lost virtue in our age...all will come in time, simply wait calmly.

Case · October 31, 2001, 19:16

Quote:

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
The absence of multiplayer alone condemns them on the unfinished game point. This is a STANDARD FEATURE of TBS games.

I've seen a picture of the main menu which includes an option to 'load scenario'. But what do you know - there's no scenarios, and no way of making them

Alexander's Horse · October 31, 2001, 19:16

I wish my words were backed with nuclear weapons

Case · October 31, 2001, 19:18

Quote:

Originally posted by Delthayre
Again, I remind people that patience is a lost virtue in our age...all will come in time, simply wait calmly.

...and pay an extra $50 for what should have been in the inital release...

CapTVK · October 31, 2001, 19:20

And I demand tribute so that it may appease my attitude.

Delthayre · October 31, 2001, 19:24

I still think too many people are impatient.

However, if they do not release Multiplayer in a free patch (even if it is available in an expansion) I will complain.

DarthVeda · October 31, 2001, 19:28

All will come in time? Prove it.

dainbramaged13 · October 31, 2001, 19:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Case

I've seen a picture of the main menu which includes an option to 'load scenario'. But what do you know - there's no scenarios, and no way of making them

WRONG
there is plenty of good scenario support, and if you give up trying to have a starting location be your only method of getting civs to start where you want, and just accept it and build a city for each civ in the spot you want them to start, theres really nothing missing, except a good earth map, which plenty of peopel here will be making anyway. Yes, the editor is a bit lacking, but it will be complet++++fine, i assure you. just fyi, though, the capability to make scenarios is ALIVE AND WELL!

RobRoy · October 31, 2001, 19:58

Quote:

Originally posted by dainbramaged13
WRONG
there is plenty of good scenario support, and if you give up trying to have a starting location be your only method of getting civs to start where you want, and just accept it and build a city for each civ in the spot you want them to start, theres really nothing missing, except a good earth map, which plenty of peopel here will be making anyway. Yes, the editor is a bit lacking, but it will be complet++++fine, i assure you. just fyi, though, the capability to make scenarios is ALIVE AND WELL!

Umm...ace, 'fraid not. What there is plenty of is pretty menu tabs...

Scenarios would require an ability to place silly, inconsequential things like units and cities on a map. And that's just to get started. We can't even get started in the current environment. And if you want a scenario to be any good, it will usually require some kind of scripting language. While there is a possibility that the editors will be patched to allow basic scenario construction sometime soon, I haven't seen any talk of an event/scripting language at all (other than the denials that there was any plan to put such in the initial release).

Perhaps there's a terminology problem, here...if you mean simple modpacks, just customizing the rules and perhaps the maps, then yes, that very limited functionality is "alive and well", i assure you (well, assuming you don't want to do anything silly like play on a flat world, like a historical European or mid-eastern map...and assuming you don't mind your civilizations starting locations to be randomized).

techumseh · October 31, 2001, 20:09

Quote:

Originally posted by dainbramaged13

WRONG
there is plenty of good scenario support, and if you give up trying to have a starting location be your only method of getting civs to start where you want, and just accept it and build a city for each civ in the spot you want them to start, theres really nothing missing, except a good earth map, which plenty of peopel here will be making anyway. Yes, the editor is a bit lacking, but it will be complet++++fine, i assure you. just fyi, though, the capability to make scenarios is ALIVE AND WELL!

No dainbramaged, you are wrong. If you can't place units with the editor, if you can't trigger an event when a certain city falls, then you can't make a scenario. There is a very limited capacity to make mods with Civ3. That's all. You can make a Canadian or Polish civilization, or make your F-15 even better, but you can't [C-A-N'-T] recreate an actual historical situation. Can't. No. Really.

Döbeln_2001 · October 31, 2001, 21:16

Quote:

Originally posted by techumseh
Well I have. It's incomplete and unstable.

What you running? Just got off a 3-hour session without instability, running Win XP. Just curious...

Regards / Döbeln 2001

Roland Ehnström · October 31, 2001, 21:57

Stuie wrote:
"Why not try playing the game instead of coming around and being such a Yin."

ROTFLOL!!!

Best one in ages!

Peace!

-- Roland

Dr. Nick · October 31, 2001, 22:04

Down with Firaxis! Booooooo!

Jason · October 31, 2001, 22:06

No crashes here. Very positive experience so far.

Seriously, nothing personal to DV, but you aren't qualified to say anything very strongly just based on what goobers on Apolyton say. If you don't want to buy it play someone elses or something, but that's how you'll know this early in the release. A lot of the complainers don't know what they are talking about. IMO the problems are MP not being in and the editor not being complex enough. If they patch those instead of selling them I'm happy.

Chill, people. Trashing it before you play it, lol