Any signs of the second patch?

Pembleton · January 24, 2002, 23:25

I apologize if this has been asked several/many times recently, but is there any news concerning the second patch? Of course, if they don't introduce stacks (at least for workers because of the horrendous pollution micromanagment mid-late game), I won't really care. But since they never answered the question of whether they would include stacks or not after being asked many times, we all have to wait for the actual patch to find out.

Hasn't it been about two months since the first patch?

MonsterMan · January 24, 2002, 23:36

The next patch will likely contain multi-player, and they won't release the patch until they've finished working on that feature... I think. In either case you'll hear about it first on www.civ3.com

Encomium · January 24, 2002, 23:40

I could care less about multiplayer.

Let Firaxis GET RIGHT the game they already sold us first. It will take several patches to even come close to doing that.

FIRAXIS:

1. Less corruption.
2. Smarter AI.
3. Naval units can effect trade and commerce.
4. Less culture flipping and no vanishing garrisons.
so much more. . .

I could go on. Just read the complaint threads, Sid. And get it right next time.

Dis · January 24, 2002, 23:42

mp will be in xp

Bilas · January 25, 2002, 09:39

Quote:

Originally posted by MonsterMan
The next patch will likely contain multi-player, and they won't release the patch until they've finished working on that feature... I think. In either case you'll hear about it first on www.civ3.com

Huh?? Did they not make this game without MP? Then why should everyone who paid $$ have to wait until MP comes out? I think we should have it now

Nuff Said!

OneFootInTheGrave · January 25, 2002, 10:12

Well they could release the next build to us now...

or at least tell us approximate date of next patch, MP is coming in Spring that means at least 2 months wait I guess we should get another patch in between.

Thant would be nice

Azrikam · January 25, 2002, 10:18

If I remember correctly, we didn't get a list of fixes until after the first patch was released. So, I don't expect we'll know what's on it, until the 2nd patch is completed.

Zachriel · January 25, 2002, 11:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Encomium
I could care less about multiplayer.

Let Firaxis GET RIGHT the game they already sold us first. It will take several patches to even come close to doing that.

FIRAXIS:

1. Less corruption.
2. Smarter AI.
3. Naval units can effect trade and commerce.
4. Less culture flipping and no vanishing garrisons.
so much more. . .

I could go on. Just read the complaint threads, Sid. And get it right next time.

They did get it right. I like it the way it is and play the game straight up. Also, 1 and 4 can be adjusted in the editor. Indeed, you can create a Wonder that puts a Palace in every city if you want.

Zachriel · January 25, 2002, 11:50

Quote:

Originally posted by Bilas
Huh?? Did they not make this game without MP? Then why should everyone who paid $$ have to wait until MP comes out? I think we should have it now
Nuff Said!

I'm not even sure I understand your post.

The game box doesn't say anything about MP. If they want to charge for enhancements, that is the way of the world. If you don't want to buy it, don't.

I currently pay $10 a month just to play Asherons Call and to pay for updates. I would cheerfully pay a subscription for monthly updates to Civ, as well. I don't expect the gamemakers to work for free.

Willem · January 25, 2002, 12:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Zachriel

They did get it right. I like it the way it is and play the game straight up. Also, 1 and 4 can be adjusted in the editor. Indeed, you can create a Wonder that puts a Palace in every city if you want.

I didn't realize we had any control over the flipping. What are the adjustment areas available? I have a brother who would love to know, me I could care less.

dr.charm · January 25, 2002, 12:18

I'd settle for a functional editor, you know, one that will let you do wild and crazy stuff like *MAKE A SCENARIO* or even *SET STARTING LOCATIONS*!! I know, crazy, crazy.

Cheers,

Dr. Charm

Bilas · January 25, 2002, 12:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Zachriel

I'm not even sure I understand your post.

The game box doesn't say anything about MP. If they want to charge for enhancements, that is the way of the world. If you don't want to buy it, don't.

I currently pay $10 a month just to play Asherons Call and to pay for updates. I would cheerfully pay a subscription for monthly updates to Civ, as well. I don't expect the gamemakers to work for free.

LOL!!! Now I have heard everything! Paying for patches! More power to you man.. send the money to Firaxis so they can patch the game! I figure 1 patch a month for 6 to 12 months and along the way a couple of expansion packs for about 20$ a piece I think they will love you indeed!

Peace

Zachriel · January 25, 2002, 12:32

Quote:

Originally posted by Bilas
LOL!!! Now I have heard everything! Paying for patches! More power to you man.. send the money to Firaxis so they can patch the game! I figure 1 patch a month for 6 to 12 months and along the way a couple of expansion packs for about 20$ a piece I think they will love you indeed!

Peace

Patches are usually free, as they correct problems with existing features. Indeed, Civ3 has been provided free patches and may have more on the way.

Updates are generally not free, and yes, I would be glad to pay for an enhanced version of the game.

dr.charm · January 25, 2002, 12:35

Surely you don't mean 'updates' which actually add the functionality that is promised on the game box do you? Do you think we should pay to 'update' the editor so that it actually does something?

Cheers,

Dr. Charm

Willem · January 25, 2002, 12:44

Quote:

Originally posted by Bilas

Huh?? Did they not make this game without MP? Then why should everyone who paid $$ have to wait until MP comes out? I think we should have it now

Nuff Said!

You should checkk out this thread. In fact everyone should.

Willem · January 25, 2002, 12:49

Quote:

Originally posted by dr.charm
Surely you don't mean 'updates' which actually add the functionality that is promised on the game box do you? Do you think we should pay to 'update' the editor so that it actually does something?

Cheers,

Dr. Charm

Well I don't know... I've been keeping busy with the editor (hacked) for weeks now. You can't make scenarios yet, but there's lots of other things to do, especially with the CopyTool utility.

dr.charm · January 25, 2002, 12:54

So all you had to do was hack the editor?

Sorry, I'm just a bit ticked because I'd really like to make some scenarios and the fact that this simple (and advertised) feature is not available 3 months after release is more than a little bit annoying.

Cheers,

Dr. Charm

hexagonian · January 25, 2002, 12:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Zachriel
Patches are usually free, as they correct problems with existing features. Indeed, Civ3 has been provided free patches...

The correct term is patch... (emphasis on the singular), unless you count the rushed first patch release and the release of the second patch that fixed the first patch.

I'm still waiting for the patch that will address the issues brought up on the Forums such as

- Unit stacking and grouping to alliviate late game tedium
- Rebellion Notification for cities on the verge of returning to their original civ
- Various Combat/Culture/Corruption balances
- Robust Scenario Editor

I refuse to pay for a Gold Version that fixes these issues.

Pembleton · January 25, 2002, 13:08

Yikes, I just wanted to know if they were indications of a second patch anytime soon or not soon even. I didn't mean for this thread to turn into a repetition of what people have been saying about MP or whatever else since day 1 of the game's release.

Willem · January 25, 2002, 13:34

Quote:

Originally posted by dr.charm
So all you had to do was hack the editor?

Sorry, I'm just a bit ticked because I'd really like to make some scenarios and the fact that this simple (and advertised) feature is not available 3 months after release is more than a little bit annoying.

Cheers,

Dr. Charm

OK, if you go the files area, you will find an editor that has the ability to add and delete various objects in the game. Apparently, the default editor does have this ability, but it has been temporarily disabled until Firaxis gets the chance to do some more work on it. The hacked editor has managed to bypass the blocks that were put in place, so that the Add and Delete buttons show up, and actually do something.

There are some limitations however. For instance you can't add a new unit, and it doesn't handle the Wonder graphics properly, so in both of these cases, the game will crash. For those, you will need the Civ3CopyTool program, also located in the Files area. This will make a copy of pretty much anything in the game, and write it into the civ3mod.bic file, or any other, which you can then edit later. Be sure to get the latest version, there have been a lot of additions made in a short period of time. P.S. Case in point, he has a new version today and I haven't even been able to install yesterday's version.

Now if you create a unit in Civ3CopyTools, it will just use the graphics and animations of the unit that you copied. However, there is a program that just came out recently that will let you create unit animations from scratch, or edit an existing one I believe. I don't know what it's called, or anything about it except that it exists. If you go to the CopyTool thread, drop a line to Gramphos, the author of CopyTool, and he will be able to tell you more about it.

So all of that should keep you busy for awhile at any rate. Maybe when you've figured out how to use all that stuff, the patch will be out and you'll be able to work with event triggers etc. Which is about the only thing right now that's missing. But be warned, it's a complicated game and wierd things can happen after you've poking around under the hood. So save your original civ3mod.bic file somewhere safe, and save your work often.

Tip: You can create a land based version of the Privateer so you can whack some Settlers that are in your territory without having an all out war.

bahoo · January 25, 2002, 16:00

Quote:

Originally posted by Encomium

1. Less corruption.
2. Smarter AI.
3. Naval units can effect trade and commerce.
4. Less culture flipping and no vanishing garrisons.
so much more. . .

Quote:

Originally posted by Zachriel

They did get it right. I like it the way it is and play the game straight up. Also, 1 and 4 can be adjusted in the editor. Indeed, you can create a Wonder that puts a Palace in every city if you want.

Please elaborate on how I turn off vanishing garrisons in the editor, I've yet to figure it out.

Oerdin · January 25, 2002, 17:35

Quote:

Originally posted by MonsterMan
The next patch will likely contain multi-player, and they won't release the patch until they've finished working on that feature... I think. In either case you'll hear about it first on www.civ3.com

I'd be willing to bet cash that Multiplayer will not be part of a free download. Atleast not intially. If MP ever is completed them it will be bundled into the expasion pack (so that Infogrames can charge us) or there will be a seporate Civ3 Multipayer edition.

Willem · January 25, 2002, 18:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin

If MP ever is completed them it will be bundled into the expasion pack (so that Infogrames can charge us) or there will be a seporate Civ3 Multipayer edition.

And what's wrong with that? If your boss (I'm presuming you have one here, and no offence meant), asks you to work overtime, would you not expect to get some sort of compensation for the compromise of your extra time? Why should Firaxis/Infogrames expect any less?

Daveraver · January 25, 2002, 20:59

Errr... I think the point people are trying to make is that they charged $50/hour for doing janitorial work. (which I guess would make the LE wiping the nasty area around the urinals and tacking on another $10/hour?)

Quote:

Originally posted by Willem

And what's wrong with that? If your boss (I'm presuming you have one here, and no offence meant), asks you to work overtime, would you not expect to get some sort of compensation for the compromise of your extra time? Why should Firaxis/Infogrames expect any less?

kailhun · January 26, 2002, 08:27

The only sign of a next patch is that on www.civ3.com there is a 'patches' button and not 'the patch'. It seems to imply that more patches will be forthcoming.

Robert

Chronus · January 26, 2002, 09:33

Well, I'm kind of tossed on this one. The price of PC games have been pretty consistant over the last four years or so. Or, at least, where I live. I'm not sure how we can expect better and better games without the price going up, not to mention inflation. If prices remain the same, then they have to make up the difference somewhere.

Personally, I would rather pay the extra money up front and not have to pay for extras later. I suspect most of you would agree but I can also understand the "pay for patch" method. After all, playing the game first is the best way to come up with suggestions and to spot bugs for later patches.

I also think "upgrade" is a better word than "patches" if we are to pay for it. I always thought of patches as free downloads to fix existing bugs or to add features that were declared on the final product but not delivered. An upgrade, however, is to add a new feature not promised on the box. I would place MP in this category because the FINAL product did not state any such feature on the box. Months of promising MP and then backing out a month before the release does not obligate them to deliver MP. True, it can ruin a reputation, but at least it was announced. Just how much advanced notice do you need? Sometimes this happens in the programming world. You're so close to success and yet it just doesn't quite happen. On the flip side, be careful of what you promise your customers. I don't know the exact verbage they used but perhaps something like "we are considering putting MP into the game" should have been the order.

Barnacle Bill · January 28, 2002, 12:43

Patches to fix bugs should be created and made available for free. Arguably, there is an obligation to do so. An upgrade you have to pay for is not an acceptable means to meet that obligation.

"Bug" is where:
(a) the program is unstable
(b) a feature does not work as intended by the designer/programmer
(c) an advertised feature is missing/disabled (usually due to premature publication and arguably a special case of b)

"Advertised" means:
(a) on the box
(b) on the official game website
(c) announced by an official representative of the publisher/developer in a public forum

Failure to include a feature which was not advertised does not constitute a "bug". The publisher/developer is under no obligation to add such features for free - even if the majority of players thinks their lack ruins the game. Failure to make a feature work "this other way" instead of the way the designer/programmer intended does not constitute a "bug" - even if the majority of players think the designer/programmer's intention was a big mistake that ruins the game. It might be good business sense to make those sort of changes for free, but no moral obligation exists to do so.

The game was advertised (as defined above) as having enhanced scenario/mod capabilities. To use the legal principle, a "reasonable person" would assume that "enhanced" in the context of a sequel is relative to the previous iteration in the series, and means a net gain in capability - i.e. that any capability from Civ2 not carried over into Civ3 is more than compensated for by new capabilities in Civ3 (if it is a wash beteen the Civ2 capabilities cut and the new Civ3 capabilities added, that's not "enhanced"). As it is not, the scenario/mod capabilities of Civ3 are a giant leap backwards as compared to Civ2, so they need to fix the editor for free.

Since I don't play MP, I didn't really pay any attention to whether or not they "advertised" it. If they did, they are obligated to add MP in a patch. Otherwise, it is OK to charge for it. Again, it might make business sense to do it for free, but they don't HAVE to.

"Smarter AI" is entirely subjective. If they advertized "smarter AI", that is so nebulous they can probably make the case they delivered it. If they promised it in measurable terms, then you have something to judge by. If they never promised it, then it is like MP above.

"Culture flipping", corruption, air units can't kill things, naval units not affecting trade & commerce, no stack movement etc... as I understand it, all work the way Firaxis intended and do not contradict any advertised feature descriptions. We may not like it that way, but it isn't a bug and they don't HAVE to patch it - they can charge us for an enhanced version which addresses those things or ignore us, as they please (from the moral side - business sense is a different question).

I'm not real sure what "vanishing garisons" refers to. Unless this means what happens to your garrison when a city "culture flips", I have not experienced it. If that is what it means, then it is like the other stuff that is not a bug because it works as Firaxis intended, so they don't have to patch it.

I personally think the design of Civ3 was completely botched and may never play it again until/unless they fix some of this stuff - but to my knowledge the only thing they HAVE to "fix" is the editor (and, possibly, MP). Changing the other things via a patch will cost money, and they have to decide whether it is justified from the business sense in terms of (a) the affect on future sales of Civ3 due to "word of mouth" and the opinions of published critics, and (b) the impact on sales of future products from the same publisher/developer. What they do next depends on how that analysis goes - and their lack of response which has some people so upset probably means they haven't figured it out yet. Quite possibly it is a matter of negociation - Firaxis and Infogrames having somewhat seperate stakes in this thing and arguing over who will eat what part of cost of changing what many of the fans don't seem to like (Firaxis probably having more of its reputation on the line but Infrgrames having the deepest pockets).

hexagonian · January 28, 2002, 13:43

Excellent analysis of the situation Barnacle Bill!

...and that is why I do not hold out much hope that many of the concerns expressed by players as flaws in the game (unit stacking and grouping, rebellion notification, combat inbalances) will be patched in, but if implemented, will be sold as an add-on.

The multi-play and Editor were not released because Firaxis had a deadline to maintain. From a corporate standpoint, they did what they had to do to maximise their bottom line - I can accept that because they are first and foremost a business that has to make profits to survive.

But at the same time, these were features that were promoted and promised as part of the original release. They should patch those in, but at this point in time, I cannot see that happening either.

...and I will not buy an add-on from Firaxis.

C'mon Firaxis, surprise us!!!