Apologists

Capt Dizle · December 20, 2001, 17:45

I read many forums about various games and i must admit that this forum is the one with the most apologists.
I think Civ 3 sucks.

I am tired of reading the threads in this forum everyday in order to find something interesting about the game but instead find endless stupid defensive and childish posts. I hope you understand what I want to say. I mean I'm tired of people posting threads with titles such as "Why do whiners act like this" etc. I think they don't care at all about the game but only want to see if they will break their personal previous record of the replies they had in previous threads they started.

I believe that Civ 3 is a half finished game (much less impressive than Civ 2 or SMAC) and even more bugs have appeared with the 1.16f patch.

So, about the apologists, my question is:

Why do you think they defend Firaxis like this?

David Murray · December 20, 2001, 18:40

I think that Civilization 3 combines many of the best elements of SMAC and Civilization 2. It's still missing lots of the cool SMAC features (and some Civ2 features) but you can't really argue that it's an inferior product. A "not quite as good as it should have been" product, perhaps.

habadacus · December 20, 2001, 18:49

My two theories are :

A) They like to believe that someone at Firaxis is reading there posts and is so happy to have more yes-men out there that they're sending the defenders free games and stock-options,

-or-

B) They have so much free time between turns while the flawed code redundantly computes city to city connectivity that they don't know what else to do.

Immortal Wombat · December 20, 2001, 18:49

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmytrick
So, about the apologists, my question is:

Why do you think they defend Firaxis like this?

Because they genuinely believe Firaxis is not to blame with many of the "problems" with Civ3?

Spiffor · December 20, 2001, 19:12

They like having pointless fights with whiners, like whiners like having pointless fights with fanboys ?
They are pissed by the stupid trolling of whiners, and then start stupid trolling themselves, which motivates whiners to answer with stupid trolling etc etc. ?
The most excessive apologists taken apart (Ozymandandous), I suppose they just want to make it clear that they enjoy Civ3, and that the whiners / criticizers do not represent the one and only opinion about civ3. Maybe it's a bit childish not to let morons (oops, I meant "people who don't think like you"

) alone, but I suppose it comes from the excessive critic which come from some whiners, how couldn't you react when someone throws out "this game sucks bigtime ! I lost my tank to a pikeman !", about the game you are enjoying ? It's provocation, and most fanboys end up provocating the whiners alike ("whiners" poll).
This poll is a part of the great war which takes place here, and where it is really hard to post constructive criticism or simple enthousiasm (not apologetic) without being dragged in a flamefest

That's why I vote for : "they're the Alter Ego of whiners"

ColdWizard · December 20, 2001, 19:44

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmytrick

So, about the apologists, my question is:

Why do you think they defend Firaxis like this?

because they blame infogreed.... er, i mean infogrames

ACooper · December 20, 2001, 20:15

Because some of us have brains and can enjoy something without being whiners.

P.S. the game works well for me. (and I always win)

John-SJ · December 20, 2001, 20:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Immortal Wombat
Because they genuinely believe Firaxis is not to blame with many of the "problems" with Civ3?

Yes, I see your point. Why should anyone expect the creators of the game to be in any way responsible for it's (lack of) quality?

John-SJ

December 20, 2001, 20:29

Quote:

Why do you think they defend Firaxis like this?

... because they think any game that has Sid's/ Firaxis name on the box must be good. Apparently a lot of the game reviewers think the same way, based on the scores the game received. I used to think like that, but Civ 3 has changed my mind. Civ 3 should have been much more than it is. It's almost like a cheap rip off from an outside development house rather than a serious effort from the series creators. If the game is truly great there is no need to defend the developers now is there? Besides, they are all grown up and can take care of themselves.