Reasons to buy Play the World - Page 3

Tiberius · November 30, 2002, 15:37

Since when do you know what should be free? Medicine for old men should be free, not whatever you're fantasizing about.

As for "PtW: the Patch": what would you prefer: a good game out of the box, or an outstanding-after-being-patched game?
What botheres you, anyway? Civ3 PtW? Don't buy it. The bugs? Wait for the patches. Something else? I'm not interested.

WarpStorm · November 30, 2002, 15:58

Suit yourself, woody, your credibility decreases by the moment.

MP works well for me and the SP features alone are well worth $30. There's a lot more here than a simple patch. If you want to keep believing that that is all it is, I can't change your mind, but I can add you to my ignore list. Bye.

Cyclotron · November 30, 2002, 17:58

PTW is certainly worth far more than the first Civ2 XP, which only had 20 scenarios (some of which had already been released for free earlier).

I fail to see in what way PTW is a patch... it has all the things I would expect out of an XP in a Civ style game.

It would be a real XP even with only the SP features, but the corrected MP support makes it even more worthy as a standalone XP. Why a product like this, so far superior in additions to the two XPs for Civ2, should be considered a patch escapes me.

statusperfect · November 30, 2002, 19:21

@ Tiberius, Warpstom & Cyclotron

Couldn't have said it better myself. The fact that you still are active anti-whiners is beyond me. I would have given up a long long time ago.

thinkingamer · November 30, 2002, 19:54

Quote:

Well I played Civ2, Smac so much it was sick. I played AOK some, but got bored. It was a great looking game, but after all of the AOE, I just did not want any more.

What u r saying here is like: "because i had too much civ2 that i could not handle (or bother to learn to) SMAC" and that statement does not make AoK any worse game. Anyone (either TBS or RTS fan) can see that Aok is an better improvement over AoE than Civ3 is over civ2.

Each civ3s Civ specific unit had a different primary stats (such as plus 1 attack, defence or movement) which is cheap, but each Aoks unique units were VERY different, from an average unit. Also, Civ3's civ traits is restricted with "commercial, religious, etc." Which is a cheap way to get different #s of civs.

While PtW gave us few other different Civs with the same old "expansionist, industrious" trait with new units with almost the same identical stats in year 2002, but AoK: the Conquerors, gave Aok players a number of totally different unique units, with a unique civ tech for each Civ (18 in all) and other common techs and units in year 2000. Oh, they also had a Great campaign too (personally didn't like RTS campaigns, but for those who does, its pretty cool plus)
Overall, to me Ptw doesn't accomplish much as a expansion game.

Quote:

As was mentioned, the MP was not in the final game and was no longer promised to be part of it.

Well, normally when a game company says that "MP will not be the final game" (specially after telling to customers that they will offer MP) people will think that there will be a MP, but with bugs that will be fixed with time like Starcraft. But the case w/ Firaxis is after more than a year, MP is still not enjoyable for more than 50% of expansion owners. Very disappointing.

Quote:

I would think that exchanging tech for tech in Civ2 by giving to AI poor tech for his good tech is irational AI behavior too.

All right, i agree with u with this one, but i was more specifically thinking of SMAC....a 1999 game with an AI that didn't do any of the mistakes that u mentioned. I mean, is it fair to compare a 2001 game with a 1996 game?

Quote:

This is true for ALL civ type games, anything above middle diffculty gives cheats for AI, while lower levels gives the opposite. (and cheating starts from Monarch, Regent is pure EVEN level)

Yes, im wrong in this one too, but only by 10%. Also the Civ3's AI has a starting bonus (BIG advantage), more unit support, etc. Overall, anyone can see that Civ3 cheat more than any previous Civ games.

Quote:

This is supposed to be a good thing

Well, i never said that it was not a good thing, but it is nothing that revolutionaze over preview civ AIs.

ducki · November 30, 2002, 21:14

Quote:

Well, normally when a game company says that "MP will not be the final game" (specially after telling to customers that they will offer MP) people will think that there will be a MP, but with bugs that will be fixed with time like Starcraft.

This makes absolutely no sense to me.
Basically, you're saying that because Firaxis said there would not be MP support, people assume there will be MP support.

Huh?

Quote:

But the case w/ Firaxis is after more than a year, MP is still not enjoyable for more than 50% of expansion owners. Very disappointing.

And this makes no sense either.
It's been about a month since MP came out, not a year.

You've obviously taken leave of your logic, so I'm done trying to reason with you.

Actually, nearly all of the whines here are quite weak on logic while being very heavy on emotion and perceived "wrongdoing" by Firaxis.

Whatever.
Whine away, I'm going to go enjoy my game.

Coracle · November 30, 2002, 21:33

Quote:

Originally posted by ducki

This makes absolutely no sense to me.
Basically, you're saying that because Firaxis said there would not be MP support, people assume there will be MP support.

Huh?

Whatever.
Whine away, I'm going to go enjoy my game.

I'm glad the True Believers, that shrinking minority of gamers, can still "enjoy" the buggy disappointment that is PTW and Civ 3. Some of us are far more discriminating and demand quality for our money. But Firaxis is glad you're there for their beta products; Infogrames needs the cash.

As for "MP support". Are you actually saying Firaxis is NOT supplying those still interested in PTW with MP support??? Did I read that correctly? If that is true, it is outrageous, even for Firaxis.

Well, it hardly matters. From the reviews I've seen nobody would ever want to even try MP owing to slowness, crashing, restarts, lag times, etc.

thinkingamer · November 30, 2002, 21:52

Quote:

Originally posted by ducki

This makes absolutely no sense to me.
Basically, you're saying that because Firaxis said there would not be MP support, people assume there will be MP support.

And this makes no sense either.

Firaxis said "MP will not be the final game" before the release of the original civ3 AFTER saying "there will be MP in Civ3".......

Afterwards, they give us, a Super buggy MP For a price........ give me a break!!!!

SirOsis · November 30, 2002, 22:50

This thread is about as pointless as Civ3:PTW. You won't be able to change the fanboys minds. They have already convinced themselves that the $30 they wasted was well spent.

They can tell themselves they got it for SP, for the extra civs etc. Whereas the real reason to get the game was for the multiplayer, which is completely worthless.

You can't tell me Firaxis didn't know this when they released this piece of trash? It's all about the money anyway.

If you want to get it for someone for Christmas go ahead. After they try to play it they will wonder why they didn't get a piece of coal because they must have been really bad to get something this crappy.

Catt · November 30, 2002, 22:56

Quote:

Originally posted by SirOsis
They can tell themselves they got it for SP, for the extra civs etc. Whereas the real reason to get the game was for the multiplayer, which is completely worthless.

You are extraordinarily talented to be able to understand, conclusively, why someone might make a purchase.

notyoueither · November 30, 2002, 22:56

Hmmm. I'm having a lot of fun playing MP.

Why do you feel a need for everyone to be as insipid as yourself? You don't like it, therefore noone should. Sounds like something from a school yard. Did you lie when Poly asked if you were 13 years old?

SirOsis · December 1, 2002, 00:44

Actually I'm quite older. Which is why I recognize crap when I see it.

I'm glad someone can enjoy a buggy, laggy, tiresome and falsely advertised game. Congratulations.

In the current state of this game I can't. I hope they patch it up to a playable state so I can feel that the game is worthwhile.

My opinion is that this game is not deserving of Sid Meier's name. Maybe in the future it will be. It was released too soon.

I haven't given up on it yet since I do enjoy Civ3. I am just very disappointed. Perhaps it was foolish of me to expect quality. I should have realized that the quality of the game isn't important anymore. It is more important to milk a few extra bucks out of a franchise.

Sid, you made a cynic out of me. Congratulations.

Zero-Tau · December 1, 2002, 03:04

Quote:

Originally posted by SirOsis
This thread is about as pointless as Civ3:PTW. You won't be able to change the fanboys minds. They have already convinced themselves that the $30 they wasted was well spent.

If they enjoy the game, how can their $30 be wasted?

Cyclotron · December 1, 2002, 03:05

I haven't bought PTW, and from what I hear I may be waiting a while to buy it... but there is a distinct difference between people who are concerned with quality and people who cry a river about things they were "supposed to" get, or things they were "promised."

On a fairly objective basis alone, I can assure you of these things:
1) Civ3:PTW is not a patch, it is an XP, and it has features becoming of a respectable XP.
2) PTW is a better XP in terms of more things added than either of the Civ2 XPs.
3) Firaxis promised nothing to any of you, an even if they did it serves you right for buying a game on promises.

Oh, and SirOsis: If Firaxis doesn't care, why did they release so many patches? Certainly there is nothing in it for them...

Sheesh, if we are going to knock PTW, let's at least have some good reasons for it...

notyoueither · December 1, 2002, 04:55

Well, I enjoy SP immensely, although I don't have much time for it now... Because I am kept bust playing PBEM (workin' fine) and INet MP (tricky, but works very well with people you know and is better with 1.14).

So, if you wanna run around screaming crap, feel free. However, you are wasting your time doing that. You would be rewarded more by finding reliable people who are not using alpha cracks. You might then proceed to having fun.

There is a PTW MP forum, you know. People are using it to meet people who can be counted on. Just met another good player there. My list grows...

Bad F-Line · December 1, 2002, 09:17

Well here's an interesting fact - the boxcover of PTW's release here in the States says " Multiplayer Expansion Pack ". I saw this statement when I bought the XP, and at that time I had no intention of going online and playing it against other people (still haven't); so why did I go ahead and buy PTW anyhow after seeing this glaring MP statement? Because I knew that PTW contains plenty of additions to the SP game which are accessible WITHOUT going online at all.
I've had a blast with all the new stuff, the editor, the new civs and all the additions, all without going online a single time. Not once. Can't say that I have noticed the AI being too much smarter, but I haven't had ANY issues with PTW of the proportions that I have seen spoken of - If you were to believe some of them PTW is the glitchiest, lamest most unplayable bag o' **** ever. I don't think so.
As for MP? Couldn't care less. I have fun playing other games on the Internet, I don't need that from CIV3, and I don't need to go online to enjoy playing the Ottomans or building the Internet. I can do that in SP.
For the naysayers - step back and look at the entire product. Sorry you're disappointed about the MP ... I have no interest in MP whatsoever but I hope they fix it for you, and if they don't, hey - you have the ability to not buy it or return it if you already did. Stop telling us ' fanboiz ' that we wasted 30 bucks.

player1 · December 1, 2002, 10:00

I just don't understand one thing.

Why "PtW sucks" crowd still says that MP is unplaybele, while newest patch fixed most MP problems.

Lack of any other arguments or what?

SirOsis · December 1, 2002, 22:48

All I've said is that the MP on release was inexcusable. It was touted for its MP not the SP aspect. It did not live up to even the most basic standards of decent internet play.

They could have released it later patched to 1.14 and had a much better response from me. Instead they released it too early and disgusted me with their crappy product.

As I've said I hope it gets much better. I applaud Firaxis for releasing patches. I don't applaud their releasing of a buggy product.

I'll sum it up in one sentence for those that have difficulty understanding my point.

The game as released is completely worthless as a MP game which is what it was sold as.

As the patches come out and the game improves I'm sure I will like it. It's the disappointment upon realising the cash in my wallet was more important than releasing a quality game that really hurts.

Coracle · December 1, 2002, 23:22

Quote:

Originally posted by SirOsis
All I've said is that the MP on release was inexcusable. It was touted for its MP not the SP aspect. It did not live up to even the most basic standards of decent internet play.

They could have released it later patched to 1.14 and had a much better response from me. Instead they released it too early and disgusted me with their crappy product.

As I've said I hope it gets much better. I applaud Firaxis for releasing patches. I don't applaud their releasing of a buggy product.

I'll sum it up in one sentence for those that have difficulty understanding my point.

The game as released is completely worthless as a MP game which is what it was sold as.

As the patches come out and the game improves I'm sure I will like it. It's the disappointment upon realising the cash in my wallet was more important than releasing a quality game that really hurts.

So true.

Jeez. Looks like a whole bunch of people have finally gotten smart regarding Firaxis and its beta products, which I've been talking about for many months.

PTW was primarily touted for MP - which should have been in Civ 3 in the first place a year ago. But MP stinks even after yet another Firaxis patch.

So people are supposed to pay $30, more with tax, for several very minor Single Player improvements that also should have been patched in long ago?? I don't think so.

BUT. . . you can tell Firaxis is running scared. I just saw on Amazon.com PTW has ALREADY been slashed by five dollars. Hey Firaxis, slash off another twenty and maybe I'd be interested. Maybe.

Oh yes, when a company releases crap, such as PTW or the original Civ 3, they are OBLIGED to patch it. I give them no credit for that. It is also good business as the whole Civ franchise would have been killed if the original Civ 3 was left patchless.

Finally, MP or not, Civ 3 itself remains a deeply flawed game.

Cyclotron · December 2, 2002, 02:05

Quote:

Originally posted by SirOsis
The game as released is completely worthless as a MP game which is what it was sold as.

Well, there are testimonials from people here that it worked just fine. The beta testers told us that the MP worked fine for them.

Granted, Firaxis let some big bugs slide, but all evidence points to them not knowing about the MP bugs. Clearly, PTW is not useless to all people as an MP game... and frankly, that's irrelevant anyway because Firaxis recognized the problem and fixed it.

I see nothing to complain about. But, knowing Coracle here, he'll find something to complain about anyway.

Suit yourself.

notyoueither · December 2, 2002, 04:14

1.04 and 1.01 worked OK with people you knew and who knew how to get going.

1.14 improves on that. It expands the pool, so to speak. And it reduces lag, which the testers were most likely more tolerant of (but not blind to). We did not waste much time in figuring out who to match with for good games.

Is it done yet? I hope not, and I have not been told to pack up and stop testing.

SirOsis · December 2, 2002, 18:56

So the pool has expanded from 0 to maybe 10. Kudos Firaxis.

notyoueither · December 2, 2002, 20:07

Try tens of thousands (undoubtedly by now). They would be:

The SP players. btw, these are the vast majority of civ'ers.

The people playing PBEM such as, AHEM, yourself.

People playing on LANs or hot seat in their homes.

And lastly, INet MP'ers, most of whom who are bright enough to solve a problem when they encounter one. Granted, some people need a bit of help. Some get help, if they're not too stupid to accept it. And granted, there are some people who are unable to play because of being on the network of large institutions with nasty firewalls, or other network specific problems (I've seen one like that).

Now, I will leave you alone to wallow in your self pity, and to ***** about how bad things are. I'd rather discuss things with people who are bright enough to take advantage of the solutions available to them.

woody · December 3, 2002, 15:01

I've found this thread a remarkable example of human psychology at work.

There are many "fan boys" here who steadfastly assert that the $30 they spent on a broken game is well worth it. This is a classic example of how humans will support something, rather than admit they made a mistake and got ripped off. Cognitive dissonance at work!

I might be interested in the SP additions if the patch cost $5. But $30??? That's almost as much as a brand new game!

Oh well, I guess Firaxis will always have some suckers to sell too. Look forward to another expansion pack: Civ3:AR. (Another rip-off.)

P.S. Before the fan-boys label me as a Civ3 hater; I really like the game. Civ3, after all the patches, is a great game. It sucked when it was first released, and I won't be fooled into ever buying another Firaxis product on release, but I'm glad it was patched. However, I don't believe Firaxis patched this out of their own good heart. They had to continue to support it so there would be people left to be sucked into buying PtW.

ACooper · December 3, 2002, 15:16

As a "fan boy" let me say it is the most enjoyable game I've ever played. A good percentage of the complaints are minor or personal taste problems.

This thread is a good example of human psychology in that it shows that the "whiners" always talk the loudest and rest of us are too busy enjoying what we got.

asleepathewheel · December 3, 2002, 15:23

Quote:

Originally posted by woody
There are many "fan boys" here who steadfastly assert that the $30 they spent on a broken game is well worth it. This is a classic example of how humans will support something, rather than admit they made a mistake and got ripped off. Cognitive dissonance at work!

This is a classic example of a delusion of grandeur. Thank you for telling me exactly how I should feel about a game. I will check with you next time I am purchasing a game or a car or a new pair of shoes, so that I won't be ripped off.

Traelin · December 3, 2002, 15:27

DP

Traelin · December 3, 2002, 15:28

God the word fanboy just irks me. Since when has someone become a fanboy who defends something they like? Am I a fanboy of the Oakland A's? Of Civ 3? I enjoy both very much, so why can't you just call me a fan?

Yes, both have their faults. I still maintain that the A's will never win the Series again until the year after I die. And Civ 3 sometimes annoys me with its quirks. But I enjoy both very much.

If you all don't like the game, don't buy it, and don't rain on everyone else's parade. It's one thing to complain in a rational tone, and it's another thing to harp, b****, and moan like an annoying girlfriend.

woody · December 3, 2002, 15:47

Who's whining? It's not whining to state that PtW doesn't work. It doesn't! It was advertized as an XP for multiplayer. Firaxis delivered it completely broken for MP!

The only thing left is a minor patch, much of which you can download as add-ons (or create your own). We had more significant patches for free in the past.

Sorry, but Firaxis has gone from bad first-releases to utterly horrible first-releases. They deserve whatever criticism they get.

The fan-boys will continue to post how great the game is. Thank God there are "whiners" here to tell the truth.

BTW, I have yet to read any positive review from someone who didn't actually buy the game. That includes people who got a free game, or those that pirated it. The only people praising the game are those that got ripped-off $30, and too ashamed to admit it.

But please! Post a unbaised review, and prove me wrong!

Traelin · December 3, 2002, 16:03

Quote:

Originally posted by woody
BTW, I have yet to read any positive review from someone who didn't actually buy the game. That includes people who got a free game, or those that pirated it. The only people praising the game are those that got ripped-off $30, and too ashamed to admit it.

Well aren't those the only people that should be commenting on it in the first place? I mean it's like someone who's never played baseball say something like, "Man, it's really easy to hit a 90-mph curve." The people who have the most insight are those people that own the game, not the bystanders.

Reviews are nothing more than unfounded or minimally founded opinions. So if opinions are like a**holes, what does that make unfounded or minimally founded opinions?

There's a difference between saying "PTW has MP issues and had serious problems at release time", and saying "PTW sux, to heck with all the 'fanboys'!"

BTW, fanboy isn't even a word. It's not even a colloquialism.