A question about Sid and Civ3

miike · May 6, 2002, 22:31

Does anyone actually think that Sid had anything to do with Civ3. There are alot of odd flaws that are in civ3. I think that Sid just used his name in the game and did not actually contribute to the making of the game at all. It certainly doesn't seem like he had anything to do with it.

shamu99 · May 6, 2002, 22:56

from what i remember, he was mostly working on the golf and dino game.

asleepathewheel · May 6, 2002, 23:13

Quote:

Originally posted by miike
Does anyone actually think that Sid had anything to do with Civ3. There are alot of odd flaws that are in civ3. I think that Sid just used his name in the game and did not actually contribute to the making of the game at all. It certainly doesn't seem like he had anything to do with it.

I think he "play tested" it. He was also in the video that came with the limited edition, doing something, i think it was signing the royalty checks.

Sean · May 6, 2002, 23:37

What a bunch of cynics......

Grrr · May 7, 2002, 00:00

Nope, other than having his name along the top

.

nato · May 7, 2002, 01:29

Cynics? I thought it was well established that Sid had nothing to do with Civ3. He is no longer interested in doing Civ and he was doing the SimGolf game full time.

I didn't think this was in dispute.

Coracle · May 7, 2002, 01:36

Quote:

Originally posted by nato
Cynics? I thought it was well established that Sid had nothing to do with Civ3. He is no longer interested in doing Civ and he was doing the SimGolf game full time.

I didn't think this was in dispute.

It isn't.

Sid's name on the box was just another Firaxis Fraud. One of many.

Sid was also "interviewed" in the useless official Civ 3 Strategy Guide. That too was a fraud.

asleepathewheel · May 7, 2002, 01:39

Quote:

Originally posted by Coracle

It isn't.

Sid's name on the box was just another Firaxis Fraud. One of many.

Sid was also "interviewed" in the useless official Civ 3 Strategy Guide. That too was a fraud.

that's not a fraud. Sid's name is a license. A brand name. Which was purchased by Infogrames. The fact that he didn't have much to do with the game doesn't mean it was a fraud. There is a difference.

player1 · May 7, 2002, 04:40

LOOK CREDITS!

Quote:

ORIGINAL CIVILIZATION DESIGNED by
SID MEIER

And NOTHING else.

Quote:

CIVILIZATION III DESIGNED by
Jeff Briggs,
Soren Johnson, and
Members of FIRAXIS

The real Civ3 designers.

Skanky Burns · May 7, 2002, 06:52

[Sarcasm mode]
Yes, how dare Firaxis reveal their fraud clearly on the side of the box, and in the credits both in the game and in the manual!!
[/Sarcasm mode]

Mannamagnus · May 7, 2002, 08:11

I guess his wife doesn't allow him to play with civ anymore. Sounds familiar?

Solver · May 7, 2002, 09:54

I would like it if Sid worked on Civ 3, but I don't believe so. Sure he was busy with the Golf game, and sure Sid wants to make money, but he has to understand that:

1) Civ 3 probably appeals to more people than SimGolf
2) Civ is what made him famous and great. At least because of that he should actually devote more to the game.

Jon Shafer · May 7, 2002, 10:21

As long as his name is on it, that's all that matters. That's what will sell Civ IV. Do you really think the next game won't be entitled "Sid Meier's Civilization IV"?

Solver · May 7, 2002, 10:25

Sure it will, but we want Sid to do it! Sid surely loves Civ, and actually working on the game will fix some of those flaws that there are.

Jon Shafer · May 7, 2002, 10:28

That's true, but not always the case in the game industry. Civ will sell regardless. A better tactic would be to put a famous and experienced designer like Sid on another project, and be able to slap his name on that too. Meanwhile, Sid Meier's Civ IV will sell like hotcakes because of his name, and the name of the game series.

Kinnie · May 7, 2002, 10:53

Sid designed and wrote the program that is CIV I and II. He has finished it and doesn't want to continue working on it. As a programmer I understand that. He is proud (I’m sure) of his work but would like to go onto bigger and better things. I enjoy CIV III and think the guys did a great job. They are improving the game as I write; patches etc., and I applaud them for their work.

A Child of the King,

Primus40 · May 7, 2002, 11:42

Welcome to the world of corporate branding, licensing and Madison Avenue marketing hype! A similar example to point out is Norton Utilities. Do you think Peter Norton really has anything to do with the design and coding of this product anymore? No - and he hasn't for many years, but he still appears in ads and endorsements. He pioneered the utility program genre and created a fine product back in the days... and he was smart enough to attach his name to it as part of the license. Now all he has to do is allow the name association and collect the checks while he works on his golf game. Wouldn't you do the same if you had the chance?

But there is also a price in reputation. It is a two edged sword. What if the proposed "Sid Meier's Civilization IV" sucks!?!?! Guess who gets the smear along with the product, whether he had anything to do with it or not? Poor Peter suffers from this now, for Symantec has bastardized his fine product into their own hodgepodge of bloated crap... yet he still must do his endorsements thanks to the licensing agreements 'n' such. Give Sid a break and the creadit for changing the face of gaming for us to enjoy. Judge the product - if you like it, play it. If not, shelve it or get rid of it. Who cares who made it?

dojoboy · May 7, 2002, 12:26

Quote:

Originally posted by Kinnie

Sid designed and wrote the program that is CIV I and II. He has finished it and doesn't want to continue working on it. As a programmer I understand that. He is proud (I’m sure) of his work but would like to go onto bigger and better things. I enjoy CIV III and think the guys did a great job. They are improving the game as I write; patches etc., and I applaud them for their work.

A Child of the King,

You mean you guys have computers in Alabama?

How are the soft-shells?

Solver · May 7, 2002, 12:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Kinnie

Sid designed and wrote the program that is CIV I and II. He has finished it and doesn't want to continue working on it. As a programmer I understand that. He is proud (I’m sure) of his work but would like to go onto bigger and better things.

I can perfectly understand that, too, but Sid could just have done some design job with Civ 3. However, according to Firaxis, he did take some important gameplay decisions. I don't want him to sit down and write the code - he's now a man of the caliber that just won't do that. But as for as gameplay and balancing goes, Sid's genius would well be in place.

Actually, Jeff Briggs is probably who has done the most designing here.

player1 · May 7, 2002, 14:44

Kinnie,

Sid didn't designed Civ2 at all.
In fact, it was more involved with Civ3 then Civ2.

Grrr · May 7, 2002, 17:16

Can I have some evidence? Player?

Inverse Icarus · May 7, 2002, 17:54

Quote:

Originally posted by miike
Does anyone actually think that Sid had anything to do with Civ3.

the name and nothing more.

Peter Triggs · May 7, 2002, 18:16

From the CivII manual:

Quote:

Game Design

Brian Reynolds

with:

Douglas Caspian-Kaufman
and Jeffery L. Briggs

Quote:

Programming

Brian Reynolds
Jason S. Coleman
Chris Taormino

And from the Big Huge Games site:

Quote:

Big Huge Games™ was founded in February of 2000 by four veteran game developers: ... Tim Train, David Inscore, Jason Coleman, and Brian Reynolds.

These founding partners, who together have brought strategy gamers such classic hits as Civilization II®, Colonization®, and Alpha Centauri®, share a common vision which they believe will enable them to surpass even these outstanding achievements. ...

*Although actually designed by Brian Reynolds, the games Civilization II, Alpha Centauri, and Colonization were originally marketed under the "Sid Meier" brand, e.g. as Sid Meier's Civilization II, Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri, and Sid Meier's Colonization. CIVILIZATION is a registered trademark of Hasbro Interactive. ALPHA CENTAURI is a registered trademark of Firaxis Games. Sid Meier's Colonization is a registered trademark of Hasbro Interactive. All other trademarks and registered trademarks are the property of their respective owners.

BTW, Brian Reynolds is 'one of us': he's been occasionally posting on these forums for years.

Dominae · May 7, 2002, 18:18

According to the Civ3 site, Sid Meier had "input" into the game at various stages of its development. Whether his input was important or not, we may never know. In any case, I think it was pretty obvious that Sid was to have only a minor role in Civ3, with main purpose being to hype the product.

But this is a all secondary to the real point of my post: why does most everyone equate the name 'Sid' with "good games"? He's probably a computer game genius, but that doesn't mean that whatever he touches becomes pure gold. Many of his creations were simply average, and some quite boring. It's a credit to the popularity of his name, not his game design abilities, that Civ2 is considered his best game: in actual fact, Brian Reynolds was the lead designer, and therefore was probably responsible for the excellent gameplay. Alpha Centauri was also a great game, which Sid hardly designed by himself.

I think it's unrealistic for people to expect games to be good, for any reason. Specifically, a game is not necessarily going to be good because: 1) it was designed by Sid (or any other big name - look at how average Black and White is...), or 2) it is the sequel of an excellent game.

I think it's high time the General section of this forum became devoid of any complaints about Sid, or how bad Civ3 is compared to Civ2. Civ3 isn't as good as Civ2, that I'm certain of. But it's different enough that we should be applauding or criticizing it on its own merits (or lack thereof).

Personally, from now on I'm only going to post constructive comments on this site; I like Civ3 a lot, and I think a lot of fun can be had with some serious discussion. I'm tired of constant complaining.

Dominae

Jaybe · May 7, 2002, 18:38

Quote:

Originally posted by Dominae
I think it's unrealistic for people to expect games to be good, for any reason. Specifically, a game is not necessarily going to be good because: 1) it was designed by Sid (or any other big name - look at how average Black and White is...), or 2) it is the sequel of an excellent game.

The ONLY criterion for whether a game is good or not is: Do I like it?
I don't give a bleep whether it is well received or sells well. (Well, good sales can imply good support).

Personally, I think Civ3 is the only game in town. Just slightly better than what most people consider 'real life.' It surely is the only computer game I play.

JB

player1 · May 7, 2002, 19:11

Grr,

About Civ2, I read it in an old article. (it was with Brian)
In that time Brian called Sid on an informal meeting and talk with him about Civ2. That meeting last two hours and was very infomative.
Thery were discussing about Civ concepts.

And it was ONLY meeting with Sid due to Civ2.

(and you can find simialar info in Civ2 credits as it is in Civ3 credits)

P.S.
As for Civ3, Sid was more active, but fall back later since he wanted to make his new origianl game (simgolf)
(this IS Firaxis info)

P.P.S.
It all started with Colonization when both of them were on project.

Dominae · May 7, 2002, 20:29

Quote:

Originally posted by Jaybe
The ONLY criterion for whether a game is good or not is: Do I like it?
I don't give a bleep whether it is well received or sells well. (Well, good sales can imply good support).

Complete agreement here. I enjoy Civ3 enough to play it; given all the games I could play (or how I could spend my time doing other things), this means Civ3 is great in my book.

It's about time Civ3 got some good reviews on this forum!

Dominae

Coracle · May 7, 2002, 22:29

NOT worth fifty bucks.

NOT worth five months of my beta testing of it.

If THIS version (1.21) came out now at $30 bucks, it wouldn't be too bad. Although the lack of a scenario builder and cheat mode remains a killer.

The game also should have been called "Culture" as it is that different from Civ 2. Culture Flipping sucks.

Tuberski · May 7, 2002, 22:53

No game I have ever played is worth 50$. Try to sell any one of them for that much. You would get laughed at.

However, it has given me 50$ worth of entertainment. So, it was worth it.

Boracks · May 8, 2002, 16:37

My basic criteria is to look at what I spend per entertainment hour, subjectively modified. (For this reason, my wife and I go to maybe one movie a year; most aren't worth it.)

The two games that have given me the best value so far are Civ2 and MOO2. But there have been a lot that have given good value. There have also been some duds (*cough* Star General *cough*).

CIV3 seems destined to fall into the 'good' category but no where near the 'best' category. I think I got sufficient entertainment value for it but I can't see it getting into the 'classic' category.

The 'shelf life' of CIV2 and MOO2 was measured in years. CIV3 will likely just be measured in months.

Will I buy another Firaxis product? Probably. So far they have produced good games. Not great or classic but not a dud either.

IMHO.