Dan Magaha explains Firaxis position on late-game tedium

[Libertarian]

Incidentally, I challenge you to produce testimony from the 20% who will hate group movement and proximate unit activation sequencing.

[Steve Clark]

Originally posted by hexagonian
Hear, hear, and I am so glad for the so-called 'whiners' and their view on this game, because they offer a perspective that will never come from the developers.

hex, I disagree. Take a look at this thread...

http://apolyton.net/forums/showthrea...threadid=38347

This will go a long ways in our desires to make the game more playable and enjoyable. And you don't see any whining in it (at least something really blatant).

Incidentally, I challenge you to produce testimony from the 20% who will hate group movement and proximate unit activation sequencing.

The 20% of those that raved about and enjoyed playing Nemo's SF and RF.

Lib, we are on the same page, I guess it does come down to temperament and style. You and I know that many of the desires and fixes will be in the expansion pack that we'll pay $29.99 for. For 20%, that'll be fine (like me); 20% will scream that they shouldn't have to pay for that; and 60% won't care one way or the other. You'll see. Personally, I fully expect to buy the expansion pack in order for me to finally get the scenarios so I can play the game again. But others have a difference of opinion on that and that's fine. No decision will be acceptable to all parties involved, esp. since it probably will come down to having to buy the expansion pack for the scenarios and fixes, or not having them at all.

[CapTVK]

Steve Clark,


My experience with Civ3 is quite limited to a few hours of playtesting but if what you say is true. That the "late game tedium is comparable to the massive unit movements in Nemo's RF and SF". Because if that is true Firaxis has made a terrible TERRIBLE MISCALCULATION ABOUT THE WAY CIV IS PLAYED!

RF and SF are excellent scenarios they surpass their commercial counterparts in every aspect. But they were only meant for the true fans, the grognards, the people who love strategy. I love those scenarios although it can be tedious to plan, shift and move hundreds of units around. And if a diehard civfan feels that way...How would a newcomer to Civ3 feel? Control hundreds of units all over the map, doing what?

In a scenario like SF and RF there is a goal to strive for. But in a regular game? Conquer the world? UN or Cultural victory? Okay, but you have to shuffle hundreds of units time and time again. After two or three I can imagine that people get bored of Civ3 and forget about it.


Not good

[Steve Clark]

Cap, I would agree that's an accurate assessment. Civ always has been about units, the common thread that connects 6000 years of history. Historically, there are more real-life units on this earth than in the past. So what do you do? Eliminate the Modern Age from the game altogether? Or if you abstract it even more, wouldn't you lose the critical control you would need at the beginning? Even with better control of modern units, you can't get away from the sheer numbers (just like in Civ2). So what's really the solution?

For me, that's why I have been keying on scenarios for the 2 years I have been here. If I want to play grognard in the modern age, I'll load up a WW2 scenario. If I just want to fight with 7 different kinds of war chariots, I'll play an ancient age scenario. When I said many times that if you want the [insert your favorite] age to last longer, go play a scenario and don't mess with the regular game. Instead what they did was to take four full scenarios and merged them together into the Civ3 regular game. That was not the right design choice, imo. Instead, they should have made the regular game not too short but not too long, and concentrate more on designing, testing and releasing as many scenarios as possible (as well as the full ability to create new ones). Oh well.

[Libertarian]

A couple weeks ago, I was delighted to discover my wife playing a game of Civ3. I looked over her shoulder and saw fortified units (including workers) all over the place. "Why," I asked, "aren't you using those units?"

"I don't know what to do with them," she replied, "and they're too much trouble to mess with."

Out of the mouths of newbies...

[Lemmy]

"I don't know what to do with them," she replied, "and they're too much trouble to mess with."

i think that's why they put the "automate" button there...

about the features not in the game:
You're absolutely right that they are not in the game now, but they haven't dropped any them for good, at least not officially. They certainly screwed up by releasing the game unfinished, but while they are still working on it, i won't say they exaggerated the product. IMO you can't pass judgement over an unfinished product.

hmm, i really must be one of the optimists here judging by this post..

[Libertarian]

i think that's why they put the "automate" button there...

Sadly, you're probably right. That probably IS why they put that button there. It would be like airlines providing oxygen masks for the reason that they intend to supply no air to the passenger compartments.

They certainly screwed up by releasing the game unfinished, but while they are still working on it, i won't say they exaggerated the product.

Then kindly reconcile the exaggerations that I enumerated in some detail on the previous page.

[Desert Dog]

Originally posted by Ming


You don't seem confused to me... That's exactly what happened.
Publishers needed quick reviews so that they could be first, and that's just what they all are... quick reviews. You really need to play the game for a long time to write a good review. I would have loved to have a read a review by Libertarian after he had played the game...

Plus, the online and magazines concerns are in bed with the publishers of games. That is where the bulk of their advertising revenues come from a bad system to say the least, but that's reality. Even when they are critical, they never go far enough. Add that to the poor quality of game testing, and it's no surprise why anybody with a half a brain won't buy a game based on those types of reviews

Gee even one of the moderators are coming across with the TRUTH about the OVER RATINGS of the "unfinished" Civ 3. I have played the game EXTENSIVELY and I rate the game a 6.5 at best! I am even doubting that Firaxis can afford or even cares about fixing the major issues. People who complain about the game are called whiners. This pisses me off big time, when I complain it is for a reason. If the game was a 9.0 I would not be complaining I would be playing and having fun.
The most SURPRISING thing is that the patch actually makes the game MUCH worse then if you did not install it. I personally keep getting crashes when trying to enter the industrial or modern ages.
Another surprising thing is how many people are sticking up for this "POOR" excuse of a sequel of civ 2. I am playing the game without the patch because I am a "Die Hard" addict of civ 2.
This should have been called Call To Power 3 CTP as most TRUE civ 2 lovers know is a rip off of the civ 2. The game had some good things in it, but fell short big time with game play. (Mainly the diplomacy problems which never were fixed!)

All I want is a patch to make this game more playable then it is. I have YET to finish one game. I keep having problems with every single one. I am playing game #51 right now. Hopefully it will not crash so I can see the end!
Firaxis is HIDING for some reason. They won't even address the problems pretending they are not there? I like the old Firaxis they admitted the problems and worked very hard to correct them. What do we get with the New Firaxis, statements like "We will not respond to customers expectations not being met!" What the hell kind of thing is that for a company to say. Expectations are a game that is playable without waiting "MONTHS" for a fix to play it! SMAC had many problems Tim Train came right out and said we are working on the patch as fast as we can. He kept in touch with the entire community. Does anyone remember this?

Desert Dog

[Libertarian]

Hopefully it will not crash so I can see the end!

Oh, you're in for a real treat: a message complete with exclamation point.

[Desert Dog]

Originally posted by Libertarian


Oh, you're in for a real treat: a message complete with exclamation point.

The real treat is geek jerkoffs like you making comments about someone's posts. I am sorry my grammer does not fit your "approval" or whatever. Just one thing, who labeled you the person who approves or disapproves of everyone's posts? Should I go through you first before posting "LORD"?

PLEASE everyone that just trys to flame everyone, what is your point? Are you so "INSECURE" with yourself that you must spend all your time putting down others to rise above them?

I find you very pathetic and funny at the time, but in the end you just make me sick. You represent only yourself and a few other small individuals who seem to spent all their time trying to correct and discredit everyone's posts. You are making a complete ass out of yourself and this website in my opinion.
This place is for civ players to come and voice theirs views etc. This is NOT a place to control or try to otherwise be the KING of. If you do not like what I post skip it instead of wasting everyone's time with your rants.. Now you got me ranting and raving. Merry freaking Christmas I hope your ego is big enough!

Desert Dog

[Ming]

Desert Dog...
Lib wasn't commenting on your grammer or flaming you.

He was just commenting that when you win a game of Civ III, all you get is a simple message saying you won. No great victory movie.... just a boring simple one screen message.

He was saying that it isn't worth seeing the end of a game

[Libertarian]

Wow.

[Kolyana]

Desert Dog: HAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA.

Yes, it is hard to believe that is all your infor when you finally win a game, but Lib was *not* attacking your post.

Now I *really* hope that you get to finish a game, then it'll all make sense.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"You Won!"

[francoImpaler]

Last night I played CivII for the first time in a couple of years. I was looking for a perspective between II and III.

Guess what, CivII is magnitudes better. I know that's no revelation but everything about the game is higher quality except for the outdated graphics.

Here's a clue for the designers. I would rather pay more for a high quality game than be satisfied with crap designed to meet the $49 price point.

CivIII is retro to SMAC, What happened?

[Heliodorus]

Wow, all the way to page 3 before a true ad hominem attack (I hope Desert Dog's was a misunderstanding, as a couple others seem to think).

Now, in this whole debate about stacked movement/logical activation, I think the most important point being overlooked is this:

Firaxis chose to commit multiple "sins of omission," the analysis of which leaves me extremely disappointed, and contemplating whether I should be angry (which I will choose against, because life is too short to get angry about disappointment with a game).

The most egregious sin of omission is clearly that the production team did NOT PLAYTEST THOROUGHLY ENOUGH.

I don't care who's fault that was (and in fact it was everyone's fault in the production cycle because no one put a so-called foot down). I also don't care what the motive was for this omission (although it clearly smells of financial incentive/release date).

From that omission comes a host of other omissions which have ONLY widened the rift between the fan community and the production crew.

Specifically, the production crew repeatedly chose NOT to reveal that they made the playtesting compromise. Moreover, they continually chose not to reveal future plans for patches/improvements (possibly because they didn't want to reveal the playtesting compromise). So what you have is a production crew that compromised its integrity, and instead of redeeming its integrity in admitting this, it continued in the denial. Finally, they are still choosing not to fix the issues brought up by the community that hugely detract from gameplay enjoyment (maybe because they can't, now, who knows, really).

The result is a game that could easily have been MORE fun, and a fan base that is justifiably upset that an easily identifiable problem was never addressed. Moreover, the fan base is justifiably upset with its perception (and perception IS reality) that it was ignored in both pre- and post-release stages (oh, and if you're not disappointed that they didn't playtest more, you SHOULD be, because that was the biggest insult committed against everyone who bought Civ3).

Finally, now we have the opportunity to be outraged that Firaxis/Infogrames actually could have prevented this sequence if they had actually playtested more thorougly...

The omission of right action is almost always (and this is a personal belief) the moral equivalent to the comission of wrong action. In other words, in my view of things, the actions of Firaxis and Infogrames produced a sub-standard product, and they were comfortable with those actions - therefore, they were comfortable releasing a substandard product. They did not care about quality.

On the one hand, I hope it bites Firaxis and they learn a lesson from it in lowered future sales. On the other hand, I don't want to be vindictive - I want to get some fixes that make THIS game better NOW.

So, for the record, shame on Firaxis for poor QA standards. Look what you have wrought here!

Oh, and all of this means Libertarian was more right than he knew, doesn't it?

[Libertarian]

Well, even a blind pig...

[Steve Clark]

Firaxis is not HIDING anything. There will be an expansion pack or gold edition or whatever it is called that will include a more playable version and of course, those scenarios. It has to because Infogrammes demands it because they know this license is a cash cow for them. It doesn't matter what Firaxis does or doesn't want to do (or what you want them to say or not say), they are contractually obligated to Infogrammes regarding the distribution of anything related to Civ3. So what good would it do to have Jeff or Dan come here and announce that? It would just cause a needless firestorm.

Just like they couldn't specifically state what was or was not going to be in the initial release because they didn't know what they could have gotten done by the time it had to go gold. This does not exonerate Firaxis for I believe they could have planned better (and not devote as much resources to artists). I know you think you can scream about such business tactics, but Infogrammes does not care. The alternative would have Firaxis buying the Civ license from Infogrammes and releasing the game on their website. That would not have worked because they would not be able to generate the sales to even pay for the license. Instead of bemoaning reality, let's work together on what needs to be done to improve this game. The desires for Civ3 thread is an excellent place to do this, imo.

[Libertarian]

Steve, with all due respect, we have told them what needs to be done to improve this game. We have done their play testing and have given them detailed reports. But they keep refusing to acknowledge our emissary. They don't need Infogrames' permission to treat us with common courtesy.

Besides, I doubt that the game is being spec'd by Infogrames. (After all, their helpful tip is that we should build a nonexistant port for our units to stand on.) It is Firaxis who is responsible that the game is boring. Maybe we shouldn't have offered our input. They've gotten a portion of our money already, and now they're getting our toil.

A frigging thank-you is long overdue. So is an informative update.

[Ming]

I don't know about you Lib... but I'm not expecting a "Thank you for showing us how many flaws are in our game" message from Firaxis

But seriously... I will continue to argue with you that they haven't acknowledged the suggestions or "help". Again, they do respond when they have something definite to say (and we can argue until the moon is blue whether this is the right approach, but it is the approach they are taking) and even started a thread ASKING us for our input.

So... they aren't ignoring us... or don't seem to be ungrateful at all... They just haven't figured out what they can or can not do yet...

[John-SJ]

Originally posted by Steve Clark
There will be an expansion pack or gold edition or whatever it is called that will include a more playable version and of course, those scenarios.

Steve, I can't tell whether you are serious or trying to be sarcastic or ironic. A " " would have helped.

Anyway, speaking only for myself, fat chance I'll be buying any expansion pack or gold edition of this game. Things would have to change DRASTICALLY!!! before I would even consider wasti... I mean spending any more money on this game.

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

John-SJ

[Libertarian]

Ming,

Well, I've never told a customer "thank you for pointing out the failings of my ASP page". But I have told many of them, "thank you for helping to make our site better". None has failed to acknowledge that simple courtesy.

Yes, they started a thread asking for our input. I'm too new here to know the terminology, but at Straight Dope, we call a thread that is, from all indications, abandoned by its Opening Poster a "hit and run".

I don't doubt that you have a bit of insider knowledge, given your position, and perhaps that is why you are able to paint their absenteeism with a rosy brush. But from where I sit, I was once their biggest fan. And now I feel like they despise me. Maybe that's entirely my fault.

But maybe not.

-----

John,

You betcha.

[Heliodorus]

Originally posted by Libertarian
Well, I've never told a customer "thank you for pointing out the failings of my ASP page". But I have told many of them, "thank you for helping to make our site better". None has failed to acknowledge that simple courtesy.

Not to point out the obvious, the latter message could only logically be sent once Firaxis actually MAKES the games better...



Continuing my own ironic humorous notion - Lib, what WOULD you say if the folks over at Firaxis said thanks for helping make improvements before they actually did anything about them?

I wouldn't dare send you one until afterward...

[Ming]

Originally posted by Libertarian
Ming,
I don't doubt that you have a bit of insider knowledge, given your position, and perhaps that is why you are able to paint their absenteeism with a rosy brush.

My position

HA HA HA HA

I'm only a mod and a long time poster

You know as much as I do when it comes to insider knowledge

I base my opinions (for what they are worth) on my almost 50 years of life experience... not insider knowledge

A mod... insider knowledge... stop it, you're killing me

[Libertarian]

Continuing my own ironic humorous notion - Lib, what WOULD you say if the folks over at Firaxis said thanks for helping make improvements before they actually did anything about them?

I would say, "You're welcome."

But you've morphed the analogy into a red herring. What we should be thanked for at this point, as I said, is the play testing.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by Lemmy
Go Ming!!!

Someone mentioned Firaxis exaggerated the product, did they really? Did they promise features that aren't in the game? I don't think so.

Boy are you wrong. I guess you haven't play-tested the entire game yet. I posted several "quotes" from the magazine ads, and the online articles that stated what Civ3 was going to have in the way of features, and it has nowhere near what it said it would. I'll give you one, the "un-precidented editor" with "greatly expanded scenario design capability". To say such a thing, implies everything, but in reality means nothing. I've tested the editor's limits, and those quotes are exgarerated! But I'm not going to get into this with you, as I've argued and WON this point with too many people. And since you just walked in on the conversation it would be a waste of my time. Sorry.

about Firaxis answering questions:
They could say what exactly they are working on right now, and what they're fixing, but what if they change their minds, and won't to try a different approach, or even worse, they find out it can't be fixed, due to lack of resources or just plain impossible.

Then they would more fans angry then now, because they said they were fixing it (which could be interpreted as a promise to fix it).

Either way they'll have angry fans, it's naive to think that a game company won't have negative feedback. And I don't know exactly what's bothering Lib on this peticular point, but what bothers me, is that not only have my "posts" been completely ignored, but when they do answer they give us a "when we know something, we'll let you know". Thats fine. But that's also lying. These guys at Firaxis KNOW exatcly whats going on behind the curtain. They KNOW exactly what sort of features are possible, and what aren't. The PROBLEM is, they won't share with the rest of the class, as I said before. And if they change their mind half-way through production, big deal. It happens, just keep us informed. Very simple.

Charles.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by Steve Clark
Firaxis is not HIDING anything. There will be an expansion pack or gold edition or whatever it is called that will include a more playable version and of course, those scenarios. It has to because Infogrammes demands it because they know this license is a cash cow for them. It doesn't matter what Firaxis does or doesn't want to do (or what you want them to say or not say), they are contractually obligated to Infogrammes regarding the distribution of anything related to Civ3. So what good would it do to have Jeff or Dan come here and announce that? It would just cause a needless firestorm.

Ahh, do we need to go over this again Steve? Ofcoarse they're hiding, you actually think that there are 30 people sitting around at Firaxis staring at a monitor reading a complaint forum wondering "what are we going to do about this". I don't think so. They know exactly what they're working on, and how much progress they're making. What we have here is a group of 30 people designing a product, and on the other hand we have thousands of fans also designing a product... It just so happens that our ideas are either "out of their ability to code" or our ideas are "very good". Take your pick, either way it's embarrasing for them, and that's why they are "hiding" or in other words, avoiding the forums which is essentially the fans. Its a good strategy though, I would probably tuck my tail and do the same thing, If the fans shamed my "design team". ya think?

And I'm sorry to say but Infogrames is no excuse. I don't think it's on the contract anywhere to release a half-tested product, missing so many features to intentionally piss off the consumers, do you? Firaxis could at any point have put their foot down, and said "If we don't finish this, it will affect sales and the company reputation" and stuck to their guns. And even if the contract did somehow force them to do so, what idiot signed it? Think about it. And the more money the product makes the better. In this case they released a crappy product that is losing it's value and sales. Question is, did they have any idea it would do so? Ofcoarse they did, game companies don't walk into the market without a plan. They're a (cough) professionals.

[Steve Clark]

Farley, we will have to agree to disagree. Have a Merry Christmas.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by Ming
I don't know about you Lib... but I'm not expecting a "Thank you for showing us how many flaws are in our game" message from Firaxis

But seriously... I will continue to argue with you that they haven't acknowledged the suggestions or "help". Again, they do respond when they have something definite to say (and we can argue until the moon is blue whether this is the right approach, but it is the approach they are taking) and even started a thread ASKING us for our input.

So... they aren't ignoring us... or don't seem to be ungrateful at all... They just haven't figured out what they can or can not do yet...

I'm sorry I do not agree. They know *EXACTLY* what they're doing and what can or cannot be done. They just choose not to tell us. It's as I said before, they're hiding from any real results or conclusions because they could be fatal, at this point it's a "one wrong move..." type scenario. A "nothing definate to say" saves them from being liable to any changes we may not approve of. In the future. It's like someone having an argument with you, and when you finally "prove" your point, they all of a sudden shut up and have nothing to say. It's *obviuos* what that means.

Charles.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by Steve Clark
Farley, we will have to agree to disagree. Have a Merry Christmas.

heh heh.. damn I couldn't goat you this time eh? Well (shrug) I tried, gotta give me some credit. Merry Christmas to you too.

Charles.

[LRotan]

Originally posted by John-SJ

Anyway, speaking only for myself, fat chance I'll be buying any expansion pack or gold edition of this game.
John-SJ

Neither will I. I paid for the game once and didn't get it, at least not all of it. I'm not going to pay for it a second time to get the complete version.

LR