Why no responses by Firaxis?

[Willem]

Originally posted by Libertarian
Good lord. Nobody is asking them where they're putting the nails. We don't even know if they're EVEN CONSIDERING adding the much needed kitchen that they left out of the original.

Criminey.

Lib, you're starting to remind me of a parrot that keeps repeating the same phrase over and over and over again. If they get around to it, they get around to it. If not, it won't mean the end of the world, so why give yourself an ulcer over it?

[Quokka]

Ditto

[OneInTen]

You mean to tell me that you would allow a contractor to do whatever he pleased with the house you bought, never even so much as giving you an update now and then? And you would console yourself that it will likely be what you want?

Of course, a contractor working specifically for you and being paid thousands of dollars to do so is a perfectly good analogy to a company releasing a product to the general retail market of potentially millions of customers at ~$50US each.



I'm sure Libertarian has a better foreign language term for this, but for now I'm going to dub complaints that Firaxis aren't paying them the personal attention they believe they deserve as argument by "folie de grandeur".

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by OneInTen


Of course, a contractor working specifically for you and being paid thousands of dollars to do so is a perfectly good analogy to a company releasing a product to the general retail market of potentially millions of customers at ~$50US each.



I'm sure Libertarian has a better foreign language term for this, but for now I'm going to dub complaints that Firaxis aren't paying them the personal attention they believe they deserve as argument by "folie de grandeur".

Here we go, Willem and OneInTen again blah blah blah blah. Don't either of you have something constructive or even the least - meaningful to add the the discontentment of the many fans who have lost something with this excuse for a civ-sequal, rather than bantering off about "Oh not there fault, it's the publisher" or "Hey man, they just didn't have the resources, give them a break" or how about this one "They're the developers your the naive little game purchasing pleb - thats the way it is, pay your money and shut your mouth!" Is that the vary heart of all your inconsequencial and irrelevant random blurts of firaxi-lawyer ranting? Becuase here you two are spending so much time and effort trying to convince everyone to become utopian and just love the game. But you're both being completely irritating and somewhat ignorant, not to mention the most important factor blind to the reality of the matter here, which is people are pissed off - and they aren't making all this crap up just to create waves in the forums, these are REAL problems with the game. Now Willem and OneInTen you both obviously have some intelligence, why not use some compromise and (here's a hard one for you) respect for the people that have gripes with the product/company and allow them that, they've earned it! Move along or pay more attention to the problem(s) and listen to people rather than spending so much time trying to correct everyone with cheap sarcasm and degrating cut-downs.

Charles.

[Th0mas]

Originally posted by CharlesUFarley
Firaxis should be showing more cards, give us some information on WHAT they are working on.

Charlie Farley,

Unfortunately for Firaxis in this case I disagree, if you are unable to manage your customers expectations - then don't give them any expectations!

Originally posted by CharlesUFarley
That would definately decrease the hostility towards them by a few notches

I think that for the majority this is true - but if you're happy with the situation you don't tend to post any complaints!


============= EDIT ===========================

Wow hold on there tiger --- talk about editing your post Charlie

[Th0mas]

Here we go, Willem and OneInTen again blah blah blah blah. Don't either of you have something constructive or even the least

ha ha ha ha ha

Please, if you must defend Libertarian be aware that he can haldly claim to have been making 'constructive critisims' over the last month or so!!!!

[Libertarian]

07-01-2002 07:30

No soup for you. Next!

[OneInTen]

I've got no problemn with people not liking the game, and no problem with people stating why they don't like the game.

There's only two things I've objected to in this or any other thread:
a) The presumption that because the poster of a comment doesn't like the game, it must be because the game is bad, not a matter of personal taste.
b) That Firaxis are a bad company for releasing this game (I clearly think they're not since many people enjoy it), or that they're managing cumstomer relations badly by not saying as much as some people like (How much personal attention do you want for your $50?)

I don't care if the posters on the board who like the game are the only ones who like the game, and the other 6 billion or so people on the planet would rather suck the farts out of dead pigeons than play it. Just so long as they don't state that the game sucks like it's a fact rather than an opinion (especially if they're not going to offer reasons or arguments for this view), or they state what a bad company Firaxis is. In either case I'm going to reply with why I think their points are unfounded.

I'm not trying to pretend everyone likes the game, or that it's perfect. I'm not trying to make people who don't like the game like it. I just want people to realise that the things they see as fatal flaws in the game are often the very same things that others love about the game (and vice versa). When this is the case, I don't understand how can anyone say Firaxis have done a horrible job in an objective sense.

As to this thread, the title of it says it all: "Why no response from Firaxis?" It's asking a question. I've attempted to answer that question with reasons as to why I think this is. I advise people not to ask questions if they feel that the answers they get may offend them.

Anyway, back to the main thread of conversation, I re-iterate: The reason why Firaxis isn't responding as much as some would like is because at the amount they're making from the game, minus their costs, it probably doesn't leave a lot left over to be paying people to talk on message boards. I'm not saying it's a good thing, or Firaxis are necessarily allocating their funds in the best places (how would I know, I'm not their accountant). I'm saying it's an economic decision made for econimic reasons, and if you don't like it you have two courses of action (both economic): either get together the funds to pay for a PR person at Firaxis and approach them about the role, or don't support their business by not purchasing future products - and with Sim Golf just released, you have a real chance to do just that.

[Libertarian]

Yes, we know the reasons why Firaxis is unresponsive.

The fact that they've posted a couple of times in the last couple of days belies the fact that they had ignored questions for weeks and months on end prior to that. It's almost like they came out to make a show, like a peacock, in order to spite those who complained because they still haven't answered any of the questions that have been asked by the vast majority of Apolytoners (such as the unanimously desired group movement). Instead, they've answered such things as whether the editor versions are synchronized with the game versions — a question asked once and answered immediately.

That sort of deliberate coyness is the hallmark of mischief.

You've touched on one reason: money. But there are others even more salient, such as their sheer incompetence with respect to PR. After all, it isn't very difficult to reason out how actually responding to customers can be financially beneficial. The main reason Firaxis doesn't respond is identical to the reason a little boy holds his breath until he turns blue.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by Th0mas
Charlie Farley,

Unfortunately for Firaxis in this case I disagree, if you are unable to manage your customers expectations - then don't give them any expectations!



I think that for the majority this is true - but if you're happy with the situation you don't tend to post any complaints!


============= EDIT ===========================

Wow hold on there tiger --- talk about editing your post Charlie

Well in good taste I won't slaughter you on this obviously poor attempt to defend the views of the shameful. But I do disagree with great defiance and argue that "rather than create false expectations, don't give any expectations at all" is also like saying "Even though the dog is dead, we'll keep telling the little girl that we have no idea where it is!" Instead of being part of the problem, try being part of the solution. "Nurse we have another one over here!"

Charles.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by OneInTen
I've got no problemn with people not liking the game, and no problem with people stating why they don't like the game.

There's only two things I've objected to in this or any other thread:
a) The presumption that because the poster of a comment doesn't like the game, it must be because the game is bad, not a matter of personal taste.
b) That Firaxis are a bad company for releasing this game (I clearly think they're not since many people enjoy it), or that they're managing cumstomer relations badly by not saying as much as some people like (How much personal attention do you want for your $50?)

Well than I have a rebuttle to your objection, I bet your surprised

a) Has nothing to do with preference, it has been proven time and time again with valid and official game design flaws acompanied by facts from the many hours of playtesting the individuals (like myself) have put into the fray. Give me a secure email you don't mind endorsing and I'll send you a large list of problems with the game, and I'll even include a list of features that IO should have been included with the finished product, as a result of 5 years of feedback (which obviously turned out to be a waste!).

b)No one is suggesting the term "bad company" but it is obviously clear that the quality of the company in question has dropped since the existance of Mps. And PR is very important, and it especially comes in handy when the consumers are upset with their purchases. And regardless of how much the damn game is worth we still have a consumer right to complain and recieve respectful responses and feedback. If your suggesting that we don't deserve legitimate and complete answers to our questions simply because we haven't paid enough or that there are too many of us is rediculous. There are so many game companies that maintain quality assurance and customer support all over the world, it puts Firaxis' so called PR to shame. But I think your missing the bottom line here, this has absolutely nothing to do with "the amount of attention we can get for $50" as where it has everything to do with we collectively paid their bills for them by purchashing the product, and now we're not happy with the product - we deserve answers! And it has nothing to do with resources or convenience now, it has everything to do with respect and reputation. They're only people, but so are we - do we not deserve the same respect back?

Charles.

[Th0mas]

Originally posted by Libertarian
Yes, we know the reasons why Firaxis is unresponsive.

The fact that they've posted a couple of times in the last couple of days belies the fact that they had ignored questions for weeks and months on end prior to that.

The fact that you've posted one "constructive" post in the last couple of weeks belies the fact that you have posted numerous one liner's for weeks and months post-and-prior to that.

Originally posted by Libertarian
No soup for you. Next!

......hand over the bowl, it's getting cold.

[Th0mas]

Originally posted by CharlesUFarley

Well in good taste I won't slaughter you on this obviously poor attempt to defend the views of the shameful. But I do disagree with great defiance and argue that "rather than create false expectations, don't give any expectations at all" is also like saying "Even though the dog is dead, we'll keep telling the little girl that we have no idea where it is!" Instead of being part of the problem, try being part of the solution. "Nurse we have another one over here!"

Charles.

Charles,

Your obviously poor analagy misses the point. As Firaxis are 'damned if they do, damned if they dont' communicate - better to be very vague (although I hate to say that) than provide information that may be incorrect due to future unforseen circumstances.

This is certainly an unproductive approach - but because of the behaviour of some posters - it is the least damaging option (for Firaxis).

I am certainly NOT part of the problem - I would want open and constructive dialogue between Firaxis and it's customer base.

However, if one party is not being constructive (and sadly in this case Apolyton forum users are being represented by a minority of very negative people) how can the other partake in 'inclusive' dialogue, in fact why would they bother - as it certainly appears not to be appreciated.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by Th0mas


Charles,

Your obviously poor analagy misses the point. As Firaxis are 'damned if they do, damned if they dont' communicate - better to be very vague (although I hate to say that) than provide information that may be incorrect due to future unforseen circumstances.

This is certainly an unproductive approach - but because of the behaviour of some posters - it is the least damaging option (for Firaxis).

Okay, so rather than become informative and take a risk, it's better to become ignorant and deny any knowledge of the so called area 51. Was that analagy any better? Since when does the in-personal postings of a random user on some board have any berrings on the life and goings on of a company and its employees? Better question, when was the last time you were personally affected by an email from someone you didn't know? Fact is, you can make all the excuses you want but that doesn't change how 'damned' they are.

I am certainly NOT part of the problem - I would want open and constructive dialogue between Firaxis and it's customer base.

Then instead of arguing about it, try to become inquisative or helpful, offer some assistance rather than cut someone down. And I assure you, giving a response like "It's better to say nothing, rather than raise expectations" is only becoming part of the problem!

However, if one party is not being constructive (and sadly in this case Apolyton forum users are being represented by a minority of very negative people) how can the other partake in 'inclusive' dialogue, in fact why would they bother - as it certainly appears not to be appreciated.

First of all, the disapointment of this product is hardly a minority. I'm sure if you stick your neck out a little farther you'll see the smoke and flames. And second, Civ3 has been more than appreciated in the fony reviews and constant repeticious fanboys popping in and out of the threads with little or nothing to add to the problem(s) that exist. I'm not suggesting that people fan or foe shouldn't be able to discuss their opinions, but that they keep in mind this game DOES have problems that need to be addressed and to not get in the way of that. Simple.

Charles.

[OneInTen]

Yes, we know the reasons why Firaxis is unresponsive.

So why do so many continue to speculate about it?

The fact that they've posted a couple of times in the last couple of days belies the fact that they had ignored questions for weeks and months on end prior to that. It's almost like they came out to make a show, like a peacock, in order to spite those who complained because they still haven't answered any of the questions that have been asked by the vast majority of Apolytoners (such as the unanimously desired group movement).

Or perhaps they've been on Chrismas break and then been working hard on whatever it is they're working on, and only now had some small amount of spare time which they can devote to answering questions on some unofficial forum such as this?

As for group movement, it's not unanimous. I couldn't give a rats behind about it. It would add absolutely zero to my game experience, since I wouldn't make much, if any, use it with my style of play. In fact, it's likely to detract from it due to the risk of new bugs being introduced by adding features. I'm sure I'm not the only civ 3 player who doesn't have the need for group movement - and I wouldn't be surprised if Firaxis considers adding such a feature a rather delicate issue for the reasons I state of risk management vs reward.

Instead, they've answered such things as whether the editor versions are synchronized with the game versions — a question asked once and answered immediately.

In other words, they answer the questions they can give a conclusive answer to, and don't answer the questions which they can't. I'm sure you've had this discussion before over on civfanatics.

That sort of deliberate coyness is the hallmark of mischief.

Or rather, the hallmark of not wanting to give up any information they can't be sure about.

You've touched on one reason: money. But there are others even more salient, such as their sheer incompetence with respect to PR. After all, it isn't very difficult to reason out how actually responding to customers can be financially beneficial. The main reason Firaxis doesn't respond is identical to the reason a little boy holds his breath until he turns blue.

Given the express hostility towards Firaxis from yourself and others here, no, I'm not sure I see what Firaxis has to gain by responding to you at this point.

Even if that hostility didn't exist, apolyton and other such forums are isolated markets that it really doesn't make huge financial sense to sink too much time into, at least in the short term. And the more I think about it the more I'm convinced that Firaxis isn't in any position to focus on any intangible long term benefits of goodwill - they're a small company in an unstable industry during an economic downturn. Their priorities have to be on their immediate bottom line to survive and prosper!

[OneInTen]

Partial quote follows, as I believe it cums up Charles' last few posts, I am making every attempt not to take it out of context, but please correct me if I have.

but that they keep in mind this game DOES have problems that need to be addressed and to not get in the way of that.

I respectfully disagree with this, for three reasons.

a) I can play a game and enjoy it. So can many others. There is no need for anything to be addressed at this point. Sure, you want some things addressed, and so do I, but to make out that there's some drastic need is incorrect. So please, cut the melodrama.

b) In the threads about bugs and suggestions for improvement that I have seen (ie the threads that actually dop address the problems), there's been very little of people "get[ting] in the way". People are happy to let the discussion flow there, it's only in the opinion threads that I really see people who like the game doing what you describe as "get[ting] in the way".

c) Certainly the same standard should apply to threads where people wish to discuss what they enjoy about the game and how they might enhance their enjoyment, and also strategy threads. Yet most of those threads get thread crapped/hijacked/whatever you want to call it almost immediately by someone who dislikes the game. If you're going to criticise the "fanboys" for "get[ting] in the way" then surely that criticism applies equally, if not more so, to the whiners (I say more so since this is supposed to be a fan site). For whatever reason, you neglect to mention that
your standard should cut both ways.

PS: Charles, feel free to send me whatever lists you like, I should be reachable by email via here, but don't be surprised if it doesn't change my mind - I've never said civ 3 is perfect or has everything I think it should have.

[Ming]

Originally posted by OneInTen
As for group movement, it's not unanimous. I couldn't give a rats behind about it. It would add absolutely zero to my game experience, since I wouldn't make much, if any, use it with my style of play. In fact, it's likely to detract from it due to the risk of new bugs being introduced by adding features. I'm sure I'm not the only civ 3 player who doesn't have the need for group movement - and I wouldn't be surprised if Firaxis considers adding such a feature a rather delicate issue for the reasons I state of risk management vs reward.

HUH!!!!!!! How the heck do you play the game? You must be really bored if you find moving units on a one by one basis interesting or as something that adds to your "gaming experience". Either that, or you don't build many units

While it may not be unanimous, I'll bet it's close to 99%. I'm a strong supporter of Civ III, and even I see that group movement is a must. I derive no enjoyment by having to move fleet of ships one by one... or workers, one by one... or land forces, one by one... I don't care what the "risk" is... give us group movement please!

[Libertarian]

So why do so many continue to speculate about [Firaxian nonresponsiveness]?

Because that's exactly what nonresponsiveness does. It perptuates speculation.

Or perhaps they've been on Chrismas break and then been working hard on whatever it is they're working on, and only now had some small amount of spare time which they can devote to answering questions on some unofficial forum such as this?

No. They've answered the questions to a small cabal of their favorites, as I explained in some detail in the closed thread. It takes no more time to write a post here then it does to write an e-mail.

As for group movement, it's not unanimous.

Then where were you when the four threads that screamed for this feature with absolutely zero dissent languished until it became clear that no answer would be forthcoming?

In other words, they answer the questions they can give a conclusive answer to, and don't answer the questions which they can't.

Nonsense. Why do you make all these assertions that are demonstrably false? Particularly in a public forum where everyone can see the questions, such as whether it's possible to turn off the shading of pop numbers.

Or rather, the hallmark of not wanting to give up any information they can't be sure about.

What on earth do you image they're doing at Firaxis, contemplating their navels and hoping that someone will think of something to keep them busy? Are you saying they've been completely rudderless since their last webpage update?

Given the express hostility towards Firaxis from yourself and others here, no, I'm not sure I see what Firaxis has to gain by responding to you at this point.

Redemption.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by OneInTen
So why do so many continue to speculate about it?

They don't, I believe the silence has agrivated the wound and this is a result of it.

Even if that hostility didn't exist, apolyton and other such forums are isolated markets that it really doesn't make huge financial sense to sink too much time into, at least in the short term. And the more I think about it the more I'm convinced that Firaxis isn't in any position to focus on any intangible long term benefits of goodwill - they're a small company in an unstable industry during an economic downturn. Their priorities have to be on their immediate bottom line to survive and prosper!

Does it cost them money to simply "update" their website with a progress report every now and then?

Charles.

[CharlesUFarley]

Originally posted by OneInTen
Partial quote follows, as I believe it cums up Charles' last few posts, I am making every attempt not to take it out of context, but please correct me if I have.

I respectfully disagree with this, for three reasons.

a) I can play a game and enjoy it. So can many others. There is no need for anything to be addressed at this point. Sure, you want some things addressed, and so do I, but to make out that there's some drastic need is incorrect. So please, cut the melodrama.

Sorry, but these are FACTS and common sense. Many games with design flaws were play-able and many people enjoyed them, but no one was rediculous enough to deny that those flaws didn't exist. You're going to have to do better than that!

b) In the threads about bugs and suggestions for improvement that I have seen (ie the threads that actually dop address the problems), there's been very little of people "get[ting] in the way". People are happy to let the discussion flow there, it's only in the opinion threads that I really see people who like the game doing what you describe as "get[ting] in the way".

Well I guess that thread is the only spot where flaws and criticism can be found. I'm sure your intelligent enough to admit that the constitution of the negative criticism is much larger than what you'll find on a website. Use your emagination to start, and journey down that road of reason and I'm sure you will deduct logic and find that obviously if the element of "complaint" exists then there is a basis or reasoning behind it.

c) Certainly the same standard should apply to threads where people wish to discuss what they enjoy about the game and how they might enhance their enjoyment, and also strategy threads. Yet most of those threads get thread crapped/hijacked/whatever you want to call it almost immediately by someone who dislikes the game. If you're going to criticise the "fanboys" for "get[ting] in the way" then surely that criticism applies equally, if not more so, to the whiners (I say more so since this is supposed to be a fan site). For whatever reason, you neglect to mention that
your standard should cut both ways.

Well I don't honestly believe in these silly notions of "whiners" and "fanboys" because when you hack away at the truth we're all fans, some of us happy and some of us unhappy. And what it ends up turning out to be is a dog chasing its tail. Occasionally its mildly amusing, but most of the time it becomes frustrating as I am sure you will agree. But regardless of forum-topic everyone should be able to express themselves as they see fit (within site policy ofcoarse). It's when you attempt to cross the streams of the two matters that begins to create the real problem. But I kid you not (and I hope you will beleive me on this) there are existing design flaws and problems of a large list that would only apply to those whom it bothered. As you said before, they probably exist but it doesn't bother everyone. That's just a level of appeal and game standards to the individual preference I suppose. But some of them are not.

PS: Charles, feel free to send me whatever lists you like, I should be reachable by email via here, but don't be surprised if it doesn't change my mind - I've never said civ 3 is perfect or has everything I think it should have.

Well now that you agree that there are imperfections there is no need for me to spend more time typing the already growing list of problems/issues with the game. But if you require proof, I definately have it - in the form of facts.

Charles.

[OneInTen]

HUH!!!!!!! How the heck do you play the game? You must be really bored if you find moving units on a one by one basis interesting or as something that adds to your "gaming experience". Either that, or you don't build many units

Well, lets break it down to where stack movement would be useful:

With workers, in the early game, they're too precious a commodity to stack and risk wasting turns by applying extra work to a square than is required. By the time I have workers coming out my ears and I really don't care (usually at the time when it becomes railroad building & polution cleanup only), I can generally do everything I need to with one or two workers (almost always play industrious civs) so I don't see the benefit there.

Besides, it's mostly about military units as I understand.

My style does lean towards the peaceful, so I don't do much offensive moving of units in a lot of games. In which case stacked movement offers no help.

When I do go on the attack and am playing a warmonger game, I'll send all my units with goto to the point I wish to start my attack from. I don't find this difficult, as usually I've been pushing them towards that point for several turns before hand, as when I'm not in a war it makes more sense to have units spread out. Therefore, again no help from stacked movement.

Unless we're talking about adding stacked combat (which would be a major change to the gameplay at this point), stacks don't help you making the actual attack, since units will still attack seperately.

Finally, for the issue of reinforcements, my style is to set them on goto and let them arrive in a disorderly manner. I'm sure there's merit to gathering a second invasion force and moving them all together, but I've tried both ways, and for me, I'm more comfortable with letting reinforcements join the main group as they catch up, rather than starting a second group of units. Therefore, stacked movement would be no help either.

I don't deny that some people would probably benefit from stacked movement. I'm saying that just because you want it doesn't mean everyone wants it. I don't think it's as trivial to add in as most people think, not only from the point of view of bugs, but also because it affects the UI drastically. To properly design, implement and test such a feature is a major undertaking, and thus I'm not surprised we haven't seen it yet, and Firaxis is not commiting publically to implenting it.

Frankly, I think there are other, easier to fix, issues that should have higher priority - hence my comment that desire for stacked movement is not unananomous.

[Libertarian]

The only reason it is not unanimous now is because you have lately weighed in on it for reasons that, frankly, I find dubious. I suspect that you simply lashed out in irrational disagreement with me because you are determined to disagree with whatever I say.

And the reasons you've given for not needing group movement belies your familiarity with the game, particularly the late game, where even the peaceful player must either supervise the activities of scores of necessary workers (made necessary by the game's own design) or else trust an untrustworthy automation system.

That your units have not been ambushed on their way to their goto destinations indicates that you likely play on Chieftain level where your decisions have negligible consequence anyway, and automation is less of a concern.

At any rate, we clearly must stop saying now that the desire for group movement is "unanimous". But maybe you should change your username to OneInAThousand.

[OneInTen]

Because that's exactly what nonresponsiveness does. It perptuates speculation.

Where as answering the question of what they're working on would promote speculation also, would it not?

No. They've answered the questions to a small cabal of their favorites, as I explained in some detail in the closed thread. It takes no more time to write a post here then it does to write an e-mail.

You mean they've answered the questions of the people they knew wouldn't flame them mercilessly in response? Well, I'm surprised.

Then where were you when the four threads that screamed for this feature with absolutely zero dissent languished until it became clear that no answer would be forthcoming?

Because I don't care whether the game has the feature or not. I'm just not clamouring for it based on the fact I'd find little to no use for it. Lack of disapproval != approval.

Nonsense. Why do you make all these assertions that are demonstrably false? Particularly in a public forum where everyone can see the questions, such as whether it's possible to turn off the shading of pop numbers.

Is it a thread posted recently while someone from Firaxis was actually posting? It could have easily been missed if not (certainly I don't recall seeing such a thread, but admittedly I don't read every single message in every single thread).

Maybe they missed it too. Maybe the poster got busy and didn't have time to read that thread. There are a number of explainations that don't involve Firaxis deliberately trying to deceive you. Why must everything be attributed to malice on Firaxis' behalf?

What on earth do you image they're doing at Firaxis, contemplating their navels and hoping that someone will think of something to keep them busy? Are you saying they've been completely rudderless since their last webpage update?

I'm saying that they can't be sure they'll release feature X until they complete design, implementation and testing of feature X. Therefore, they do not announce feature X until they have done so. This certainly doesn't mean they're not working on anything.

Redemption.

Well, on reading that, a line from the "Redemption Song" by Bob Marley came to mind - "Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery, None but ourselves can free our minds". I don't know if he was singing about Firaxis and Civ 3 though.

[Ming]

Originally posted by OneInTen
I don't deny that some people would probably benefit from stacked movement. I'm saying that just because you want it doesn't mean everyone wants it.

Huh... you obviously don't follow these forums
Change the above word "some" to "MOST" and you would be closer to the mark. It is one of the most valid complaints about the game to date. More threads have been started on that subject than ANY other.

While I can understand you wanting to defend the game (I do so also), you lose any credibility when you make statements like that

[OneInTen]

Perhaps the reason I'm chiming in now is because you said it was unanimous and I really don't think you speak for me, or anyone else who didn't post in that thread. Anyway, as I say in my post above this, lack of disagreement != agreement.

In the late game, there's only polution to clean up. Not much bother for me, a shortcut key or two and it's done. Concievably I could save that second shortcut key with group movement. Frankly I find it hard to care much about the 0.1 of a second or whatever it takes me to hit the keyboard a second time.

Now if automate workers to clean up polution actually worked sensibly (ie they went sentinel in cities until polution happened, and then they went out and cleaned it without my intervention), that would be atleast 100 times more important to me than group movement.

Units being ambushed on their way to their destination isn't a problem for me - I find the settings that let units stop when an enemy threatens them to be more than adequate to prevent that from being likely. As for your snide remark about difficulty levels, well although I believe the opinions of someone who plays on chieftan are just as relevant as someone playing on deity, I play on regent and up.

I agree that should stop saying things are unanimous when you really mean unanimous between the people who bothered to reply to your thread. That's about as reliable a methodology as those phone in polls that TV shows run (ie not at all reliable). If you'd simply said "many people desire group movement" I would have let it pass. I don't like being spoken for.

FWIW, If given a yes/no vote, I'd vote for group movement. But if given a yes/no/don't care vote, I think you know where my vote would go.

[OneInTen]

Not wanting to have a grammar war, but "some" is inclusive of "most" (at least to me, some means anywhere between 1 and 100%, most means anywhere between 50% + 1 and 100% - 1).

It was a minor nitpick about Lib claiming to speak for everyone. I guess I was being excessively prideful in not wanting to be spoken for.

You can all continue to debate the issue for another 30 posts for all I care, but I'm letting it drop.

[OneInTen]

Does it cost them money to simply "update" their website with a progress report every now and then?

Do web designers work for free where you live? Please supply some names, I'm sure the company I work for would love to hire a few!

Anyway, I'm reasonably sure we're not going to see a progress report until the next patch (or possibly it'll be an expansion pack, who knows) is ready. Not for financial reasons, but simply because as Firaxis have already made it abundently clear, in the interests of not making a public commitment that they can't meet, they will not be releasing details of what they are working on until they're sure they'll release it.

What is so hard to understand about such a policy? It's pretty industry standard, why does everyone act like Firaxis is going out on a limb here?

[OneInTen]

Charles:

Of course there are design flaws and problems with the game, as with any game.

You've got to be careful about saying that it's a fact that something is a design flaw though. One man's design flaw is another man's feature.

Example that comes immediately to mind for me is rocket jumping in quake. That was an unintended side effect of the physics model being used. Yet some fans adopted it, it became used, and now appears in most FPS games. You never can tell.

So what people consider as design flaws is going to vary from person to person. You might consider feature X to be a design flaw, but to some other player, it might be the most enjoyable part of the game.

Some examples of such features/design flaws that come to mind in civ 3 are:
Culture flipping
The corruption model
Dropping of civ 2's firepower system

All of those are considered fatal flaws by some people while applauded by others. And there are valid arguments on both sides. Who is right? Which group has the facts?

What if Joe User really likes RTS games and feels that it's a design flaw of civ that it's a TBS not a RTS? Is that also a design flaw? Where do you draw the line?

Yes, there are some issues that are facts, like the problem that sometimes the game crashes when a city goes into disorder. It's reproducable, it crashes the game, it stops you from playing (well, without using work arounds). There's no doubt it exists, and also no doubt it's a problem. That's what I consider a fact.

But these sorts of things that can be definitively put in the issues basket are pretty few and far between and mostly minor (at least since the patch, air superiority not working was a biggy).

The rest are just matters of who you like vs what I like vs what a million other players like. On the whole I guess you can say that if the majority of players dislike something, then maybe it shouldn't have gone in. But we don't have access to the majority of players, and apolyton is hardly a representative sample of the world's civ players. So we'll probably never know for sure.

Every game is going to have things that people dislike, and every game is going to have people who dislike it as a whole. That's why, as I believe I said to you over at civfanatics, that the true measure of a game isn't what people dislike about it, or even how many dislike it, it's how many people find fun and enjoyable things about the game.

Which in combination with some of the other threads gives me a bit of an epiphany, the real problem with game reviews is they start from 100% and subtract marks. Really they should look at the game and find reasons to like it, rather than look at it and find reasons to mark it down, since it's certainly possible to make a game that has great graphics, a funky soundtrack, cool storyline, and state of the art editing tools and yet still fail to have that X factor that makes it a classic.

Anyway, post your facts if you want to, but I'm probably going to have to disagree that most of them are facts, even if I'll probably agree with a lot of the things you say detracting from my game experience (though not necessarily about the degree of importance).

Ugh, 2:30am, tomorrow morning I'm going to yet again wish I was a morning person not a night person.

[Willem]

Originally posted by CharlesUFarley

Don't either of you have something constructive or even the least - meaningful ...

And what's so terribly construcitve about jumping down anyone's throats just because they have a different opinion from you? All you've managed to accomplish is to make it clear that you're extremely close minded with no tolerance for anyone's opinions if they don't happen to jive with your own.

Becuase here you two are spending so much time and effort trying to convince everyone to become utopian and just love the game.

If you would "take the time to do some reading ", you'd probably find that I've voiced a few complaints of my own around here. I'd hardly call my position "utopian".

Originally posted by CharlesUFarley

But you're both being completely irritating and somewhat ignorant, ...

I'd suggest you look in the mirror on that score.

Move along or pay more attention to the problem(s) and listen to people rather than spending so much time trying to correct everyone with cheap sarcasm and degrating cut-downs.

Man you should SO listen to yourself once in awhile. But I guess in your world, calling people ignorant and irritating doesn't qualify as a "degrading cut-down". And no I won't move along, I have just as much right to voice my opinions here as you do. And if you don't like it to ****ing bad! Deal with it!

[ACooper]

No. They've answered the questions to a small cabal of their favorites, as I explained in some detail in the closed thread. It takes no more time to write a post here then it does to write an e-mail.

Teacher's pet, Teacher's pet.