Delayed Gratification - having faith

dnassman · November 29, 2001, 19:59

With all the discussions about how buggy Civ3 is and how Firaxis and Infogrames have stuffed up big time I just wanted to bring up a few issues with regards to this. Firstly I have experienced quite few bugs such as civ3 not running on occasions and the text sometimes stuffing up and few other issues but the question is do I stopping playing it. Of course not!!! (obviously people who aren't able to run or install it are not included in this category).

Further more even though I know their are several issues that still need to be addressed with civ3, and they have been thoroughly pointed out on the forum since the day it was released, I believe that Firaxis will eventually release patches and fixes when they are ready to go. That is I am happy to wait because I have Faith the Firaxis will deliver the results. It's simply about delayed gratification. I know that there will be fixes and patches and so on coming out in the future to address a lot of the bugs and other enhancements that might be required, so it doesn't bother me in the slightest until that time comes. I thoroughly enjoy playing civ3 and I simply put up with the bugs because I have FAITH that Firaxis will deliver the patches that civ3 requires. And in time, enhancements to the game will be made and in the mean time it is a great idea that you keep a bug list going so that Firaxis know what needs fixing.

The reason I have Faith that Firaxis will deliver is due to my many years of playing civ1 and 2. It is impossible to believe that a game which has a legacy of millions of followers around the world could or would be a sub-standard product. I was never let down by civ 1 or 2 because I knew that one day there would be another civ game that I would play and improve on things that I didn't like with 1 and 2.

One last thing, if you think about your playing stlyes in civ when you build military units do you go and attack another civ with the one lone unit that you produced on that turn or do you wait and build up large armies of units and then strategically place them in attack positions and when you are ready you take out the cities. This is the difference between instant gratification (sending one unit at a time when produced) and delayed gratification (strategic development of a large army). So lets just start praticing a bit of that.

So just have faith and think about delayed gratification because in the end you must believe that Firaxis will not let us down. Why would they? We are the ones that buy the game and play it. If it wasn't for us would a civ2 or civ3 ever of been created. Firaxis are listening to us and will do what the can to please their loyal customers. We must have hope.

cassembler · November 30, 2001, 01:21

*bump*

I agree, though I completely understand those that don't. Civ3 is not a game for Mom, Dad, Junior, and Sister.

Civ3 is a game for those that like to vent a little God complex action.

Firaxis has good people and make good products in my book. Deadlines and budgets are the source of the bugs, NOT the programers.

codemast01 · November 30, 2001, 02:56

The only reason we are letting Firaxis know how lousy we think their initial release is, is because we all hope they will fix it. Although hope and confidence in Firaxis is difficult to justify after seeing how buggy Civ III is. However I believe Firaxis deserves a second chance. Now that they are not bound by any deadline, hopefully they can finishing coding Civ III.

dnassman · December 2, 2001, 18:14

That is exactly what we all are hoping for. Let's hope that Firaxis do what it takes to fixed the majority of these problems. It is the only way to be fair to us. And yes the more I play it the more bugs I find and they are really starting to get annoying.

Herder · December 2, 2001, 20:52

Back when I first started playing computer games I was hooked. I have been playing PC games since Starflight 1 and Empire (Civ is actually a derivative of this fine game). Played a null modem version of multiplayer Command HQ written by Dani Bunten back in the early 90's.

Sure the graphics were somewhat crude by todays standards but the gameplay was rock solid and I never needed to patch. Ever. The first real disappointing release of a game that required patching to enjoy was Outpost by Sierra. That was the turning point in the software industry in my opinion.

Games made before Outpost were complete. The content was all there and nothing else was needed because the product was pure and not dumbed down for the "kiddiez".

The creation of the internet has allowed game companies to be lax about quality because they use this medium to deliver the actual product.

What we buy nowadays isn't a finished product. Its a sad but practical fact that gaming companies are market driven now and part of the mainstream source of modern day entertainment.

Fan sites hype the game, tease you and bring out the legions of fanbois screaming buy buy buy. You buy the game, typically unreturnable and are promised a patch "later".

Thats sorta messed up.

Sikander · December 2, 2001, 21:24

I don't share your faith in Fireaxis. They did not produce the earlier Civ games that you loved, but they did produce Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri which is IMO the best Civ type game ever produced. It was a really bold leap in terms of game play, with a lot of wonderful (and a few pathetic) graphics. voiceovers, etc. A very complicated game, which required quite a few bug fixes. As long as SMAC and it's sequel were selling at full price Fireaxis would put out an occaisional patch to fix some of the bugs. As soon as the game sales went down (late 1999 IIRC) that was it, no more patches, nothing, even though there were huge numbers of bugs identified and yet to be eradicated.

Now considering the fact that SMAC seems obviously to have been a bigger project to produce in terms of artwork and scope (tons of new and interesting things to code rather than a simplified Civ 2 like Civ 3 is), I wonder just how much of an investment in after release support for Civ 3 will Fireaxis be able to justify to it's owners?

This is why it is unacceptable for a software company to release something as unfinished as Civ 3. I can understand it when unexpected hardware configurations can screw up a program, but when whole aspects of the game simply do not work on any platform? Didn't they play test enough to get aircraft? The answer is of course they did. They probably knew about most of the problems we see on these forums before release, but they simply ran out of time / money. So they broke their contract with their customers by selling something that did not exist yet, namely a game that works more or less as advertised. They know that we are a good deal less likely to sue them than Infogrames is if they don't get their infinished product out in time for Christmas.