Do you wish they had waited to release Civ 3?

nbarclay · March 31, 2002, 00:47

Personally, I'm glad they released Civ 3 when they did instead of waiting to get more bugs out. I like the game in spite of its faults, and they can fix the faults faster with customers playing it and reporting problems instead of just beta testers. I'd like to see what others think.

notyoueither · March 31, 2002, 00:55

I have to agree that I am glad they did not wait.

The only downside to me is the response of those who are/were disappointed with the beta.

alva · March 31, 2002, 01:31

as long as they keep 'fixing' it, no problem here :-)
euh 'yes' btw for the vote

simwiz2 · March 31, 2002, 02:09

the problem with the release-then-fix idea is that many features that should have been included, such as MP or a decent editor, will end up in a $50 expansion pack rather than in a patch.

notyoueither · March 31, 2002, 02:20

The fat lady aint singing yet simwiz. Why pillory the game and the developers/publishers for something they haven't done yet?

ixnay · March 31, 2002, 03:28

I'm glad they've gone ahead and released it when they did. The enjoyment I've gotten out of it so far has probably outweighed any benefits that would have come from waiting longer.

DaShi · March 31, 2002, 05:09

I'm glad that they didn't wait. Otherwise, this forum would probably be boring.

Spiffor · April 1, 2002, 09:51

Although I wanted them not to rush (it was obvious it would never be ready October 30th ; before the game was released, I expected the first patch to come 1 week after the release), and although I don't want them to rush the XP or to rush any patch, I admit I was wrong. Even if Civ3 is far from being as good as it could be, it gave me much fun in 5 months. And if they had listened to me (glad they didn't

), Civ3 would still not be out today.

Thrawn05 · April 1, 2002, 10:03

I don't know. Civ3 has kept me entertained when it was released, since most games released during the end of last year sucked. I think it was a worth it, even if it has some flaws in it.

delfino · April 1, 2002, 13:57

around 50 dollars US for a game developping tool with a limited editor is a little hard to swallow. Mainly, and the comparison is inevitable, when Civ 2 was a richer game in many areas (more units, more buildings, more techs, wonder movies). I would rather wait. After all the complaints I have read in all the foruns and sites I have visited, I am pretty sure that by now Firaxis also would vote to have waited somewhat longer.

Jac de Molay · April 1, 2002, 14:14

Agreed. They should've waited, included all the goodies, and upped the price 15 bucks if necessary.

Dave

Inverse Icarus · April 1, 2002, 14:54

no. as much as i b1tch about there being no MP, civ would still not be out if they had delayed it for MP.

i'll deal.

Grey Knight · April 1, 2002, 15:10

The reality is the QA / testing was lousy, and continues to be. I've given up playing -- 1.17 sucked so bad, I went editing, and eventually broke the game. Funny thing is, it really didn't bother me.

Hmm - I voted "definitely wait", however given their QA, it may not have been worth it, since the "public beta" seems to be the only way they can effectively test.

Shawn

civman2000 · April 1, 2002, 17:59

yes; not because I care about the problems, but without them there would be a whole lot less people annoyingly complaining

Raion · April 2, 2002, 16:27

Ah, Civ II for those of us who remember the game, was 'not that good' also when it came out.

It changed, and a lot of what people thought should be included with Civ III was only developed later with CivII.

This gives people time to be on a forum to discuss the game for months on end, if not years.

I think the game shows the way the real world is, and that is part of the game.

I think some people make better testers than ones that might be picked up to Beta test.

Its not a game one just plays for a month and then ends, and it never has been. People still play SMAC and that was out in 1998.

People still play Civ II and that was originally out in around 1995.

Its part of the experience.

It all takes time, and that's why it can be played (seemingly) forever. (and has been for the last 10-12 years).

Grab some snacks, you are the leader, and the computer is just not going to co-operate with you.

Be a Smooth Operator!

Capt Dizle · April 2, 2002, 19:13

If they had waited to release it that woulc be awful.

Think of the terrible disappointment we would have ahead.

The current group at Firaxis are not capable of making a good game. They haven't a clue.

Civ is so good you would have had to work hard to mess if up like they did.

Jaybe · April 2, 2002, 19:27

I spent weeks with little sleep immersing myself into Civ3 when it first came out. I had more energy and was happier than I had been in a long time (even at work I was jazzed)! Of course, a lot of my fun was involved in learning the game.

I am most grateful that they released it when they did. OTH, could they please release it again, now? That was such a happy time!