OMG!!! Computer Gaming World review

[eisey~]

hey bud, sorry but i dont think you can make such broad proclamations. there is a unique situation in everyones case, no one computer is the same, no connection is the same. so lets all just settle down and have a spot of tea.

[Mad Bomber]

Originally posted by Dimension
Last week, PTW locked my machine during a delayed write and corrupted my hard drive. It destroyed my SYSTEM32 directory (making the machine unbootable) and my Documents and Settings folder (destroying my financial records and a large project I was working on, both of which had changed a lot since I backed them up two weeks ago). This really isn't acceptable behavior for retail software.

Dimension:

I would be blaming someone for destroying your hard drive, but it would not be infograms, firaxis, or microsoft. The damage done to your files is more than just a coincidence. Someone targeted these files to be destroyed. I am no expert, but I would bet that your computer was infected, and the virus or worm caused your computer to crash. The fact that you have to disable any firewalls in order to play PTW makes this the most likely possibility.

[Father Beast]

Originally posted by notyoueither


Sorry bud, you made this personal a long time ago with me. Now you do the same with someone who has been quite civil. You don't seem to be able to do anything else. You give strength to the arguement that there are very few ways to deal with trolls.

Fascinating quote, considering the source

[cavemanf16]

You guys are forgetting some things about MP though. I've got PTW, but because I use a very simple firewall to protect my Windows computer against virus', trojans, crackers, etc., PTW is so far unusable until I find the time to create some more advanced routing rules for my firewall.

Now you may be thinking I'm just lazy; surely I must have had to configure my firewall to allow other multiplayer games to connect. Wrong. CounterStrike and other games work just fine with my Cable connection protected by firewall, WITHOUT any advanced firewall routing. Firaxis chose a very poor method of implementing networking into PTW.

As it stands now, I'm waiting for another patch to come out just to solve some of the single player glaringly obvious bugs that there are. As another poster mentioned above, many companies these days have thrown out the Quality Assurance department for expediency's sake. That's bad, and so far I personally have had a far less than stellar experience with PTW.

[Cartouche Bee]

Originally posted by cavemanf16
You guys are forgetting some things about MP though. I've got PTW, but because I use a very simple firewall to protect my Windows computer against virus', trojans, crackers, etc., PTW is so far unusable until I find the time to create some more advanced routing rules for my firewall.

Now you may be thinking I'm just lazy; surely I must have had to configure my firewall to allow other multiplayer games to connect. Wrong. CounterStrike and other games work just fine with my Cable connection protected by firewall, WITHOUT any advanced firewall routing. Firaxis chose a very poor method of implementing networking into PTW.

As it stands now, I'm waiting for another patch to come out just to solve some of the single player glaringly obvious bugs that there are. As another poster mentioned above, many companies these days have thrown out the Quality Assurance department for expediency's sake. That's bad, and so far I personally have had a far less than stellar experience with PTW.

Are you using Linux for your firewall?

[yin26]

Somebody wake me up when the Gold Edition is released. Thanks.

--Yin

[WarpStorm]

Originally posted by cavemanf16
Firaxis chose a very poor method of implementing networking into PTW.

The funny thing is that is the method that Microsoft wants everyone to use since it's basically just DirectPlay (with the ports for GameSpy if you choose to use it).

[igloo_boy]

If you'd look closely at the "Reviews" page in every CGW, you might notice...

How Do We Rate? We review only finished games - no betas, no patches

So CGW rated PTW out of the box, unpatched. And the decision was, it a$$ sucked. PTW was released in a sorry state and suffered accordingly in its review. Personally, reviews like this are why I buy CGW. I want a review to tell me what I'm GETTING for my money, not the theoretical potential of a game if it gets patched. Besides, you can't honestly expect CGW to wait for the 1.29f patch before they review a game.

[vondrack]

Originally posted by igloo_boy
If you'd look closely at the "Reviews" page in every CGW, you might notice...

So CGW rated PTW out of the box, unpatched. And the decision was, it a$$ sucked. PTW was released in a sorry state and suffered accordingly in its review. Personally, reviews like this are why I buy CGW. I want a review to tell me what I'm GETTING for my money, not the theoretical potential of a game if it gets patched. Besides, you can't honestly expect CGW to wait for the 1.29f patch before they review a game.

You do have a point, but IMHO any reviewer should review the game "as is" at the moment he is reviewing it. What good is he doing to the reader otherwise? If CGW published a review on the very day PtW hit shelves, it would have been okay, but if they waited so long, it does not make any sense to me to review 1.01. A notice saying "patch needed, otherwise MP sucks" would be okay, but completely ignoring the latest patch simply does not seem reasonable to me.

[WarpStorm]

Interestingly, Computer Games Magazine waited a month and reviewed it in the 1.14f patched state. They gave it a 3 star rating and were very fair (IMHO) on the srengths and weaknesses of PTW. The strengths they listed were the massive improvements to single play. The weaknesses they listed were the bugginess and MP. They claimed that after patching MP was a little laggy, but quite playable. Their problem with it was that all Civ games take too long to play to be the multi-player experience they are looking for without changing the fundamental nature of Civ.

[I Am Jeff]

PC Gamer gave it a 68% score and only a 1/2 page review. (Note Civ III got a 92%).

One thing the reviewer said is that, "I've come to the conclusion that this game was just meant to be single-player."

He also says, "In the end, these additions are what we'd normally expect from a patch, not a $30 retail product. The fact that Civ III's online game was nearly unplayable before being patched is inexcusable, and even now further improvements need to be made to deal with the lag (scrolling and changing info screens are still very slow) and the crummy code (lost connections are common, and full-bore system crashes still occur)."

In the last paragraph he says, "I personaly think Civ III is a near-perfect single player game, and it seems only to suffer for the multiplayer element. BUt if you must 'play the world,' you might want to wait and 'play the patch.' "

I think Bert Salkmoor sums it up well. Single player is good, but multi is not. Plus the fact that PTW is not a $30 expansion, but instead should have been a patch.

[WarpStorm]

I just never understand the philosophy that any new content should be free. The new civs and single player additions and tweaks alone probably cost Firaxis at least a quarter of a million dollars to make (this is a guess based on the rate for programmers and artists in the US and the general overhead costs of running a business). This is not counting the MP at all.

Why should they give that away for free?

[Tiberius]

I also don't understand where does this "it should be free" idea come from. Do you recently go into stores and say to the salesperson: "I won't buy this because this should be free" ???!! What kind of philosophy is that? Why are you so angry then when poor people from poor countries use pirated software/games when many people from your own rich America want free software

Edited an embarrasing typo.

[MC Hawking]

1 star? that's insane

[Azeem]

I never play multiplayer (because I'd have to deal with cheaters, backstabbers, and hotheaded people that take something as simple as a game too personally) and play only single player. After some very bad experiences playing online, I avoid online gaming.

I think PtW's single play is absolutely great (although I prefer modding it myself to make the game even more enjoyable). Although it has many flaws, I think PtW deserves at least 4 stars for single play. I'd give Civ3 only 3.5 stars though, since it was extremely buggy on my computer.

BTW, some of you people really need to calm down and stop taking things personally. I've seen worse on the old Black&White and Diablo II forums, though. This is a GAME not real life. Get out of the virtual world and come back to the real world, OK?

[Mad Bomber]

Originally posted by WarpStorm
I just never understand the philosophy that any new content should be free. The new civs and single player additions and tweaks alone probably cost Firaxis at least a quarter of a million dollars to make (this is a guess based on the rate for programmers and artists in the US and the general overhead costs of running a business). This is not counting the MP at all.

Why should they give that away for free?

Warpstorm:

I agree that PTW should not have been free, but it is not worth the $30 that I payed for it either. This is a true XP, and should retail at half of the current retail price. Infograms would still make a bundle selling it at the $10-15 price range, and no one would care that MP doesn't work. Personally I don't care about MP, but asking me to pay $30 primarily for a feature that is broken is flat out wrong, Infograms should be ashamed by their greed.

[Tiberius]

Hence the name: InfoGreed.

[tinyp3nis]

The IP changing is real, it happens with some isp. I don't have it, my IP is constant but I have allways assumed games can work around this problem. Is this yet another Ptw flaw or are there no games that can overcome this? I was under the impression that there are, but I'm not 100% sure. Anyone?

[MosesPresley]

The review was fair. Get over it. MP didn't work for most people out of the box.

[player1]

But, was game operational at release is NOT IMPORTANT anymore.

Since reviews serve to review game as it is TODAY, in order to help customers is it worth or not.

So, since TODAY, there are 2 patches, which fixed many probelms review is just LIED customers that game TODAY is still completly unplayable.

[Father Beast]

Originally posted by WarpStorm
I just never understand the philosophy that any new content should be free. The new civs and single player additions and tweaks alone probably cost Firaxis at least a quarter of a million dollars to make (this is a guess based on the rate for programmers and artists in the US and the general overhead costs of running a business). This is not counting the MP at all.

Why should they give that away for free?

So, are you suggesting that the patches released for civ3, that made the game so that it doesn't crash all the time, that made various features work the way they were supposed to (like air superiority),etc. etc., should be PAID FOR???

To some people, and some companies, this comes under the heading of supporting your product. to a lot of people, Civ3 SHOULD have shipped with multiplayer working, Like Alpha Centauri did. The company was even making noises about adding MP in a patch. didn't do it, but since they put it in an XP, I think that we are OK to say that it ought to WORK before we buy it.

AND, correct me if I'm wrong, but all those civs and units available in our files section I believe are available FOR FREE. the creators didn't feel bad about posting the results of who knows how much hard work for free. In fact, I believe the XP is asking people to pay for some of that very content.

hmmmmnnnn......

[player1]

FIRST with 40-50$ you payed for Civ3 you paid for Civ3 patches too.

Now, that price DID NOT include MP.

You agreed, by taking Civ3 that you get SP game, not MP game.

There were some bugs with Civ3, and some of them were FIXED. You got even some bonus material to enchnce gameplay.


So for MP you need to pay extra.


Also, for these 30$, you also pay for all paches that will be released later to fix PtW MP, all later bug-fixes and that Japanisse scenario that will be done later.

You didn't payed for some scenatios shipped with PtW, since they are avaiable wuthout it.

But you payed for thsoe scenarios with BIX extension, since they could only be done by FIraxis, or betatesters.
(and I don't think that betatester want any money for that)

So yes, with 30$ for PtW you already payed for all patches that will be released later.


P.S.
And as for Civ3, I think that it's own patches were pretty good to warant original cost of Civ3.

That's why I bought PtW. If Civ3 patching was bad, and PtW was good as it was with its relvese I would not buy PtW.

But, sicne that's not case, I'm satisfied customer.

[woody]

I agree that multiplayer support shouldn't be free. But is a broken, laggy, poorly implemented multiplayer experience really woth $30?

The other things you get for the $30 are some extra civs, units, and scenarios. Wow... some of that Firaxis just stole from the mod community, and the rest is pretty basic modding. Is that really worth $30?

The bug-fixing in PtW should be free! Bug Firaxis has chosen to abandon the Civ3 players, unless they cough up $30 for future bug-fixes.

By the way, I don't think Firaxis will ever finish PtW (i.e. fix all the bugs and lag in multiplayer). They wouldn't dare make another expansion pack for Civ3, and so there's no incentive to keep the existing community happy.

Civ3 is well worth the $50. PtW... ha!

[player1]

I agree that multiplayer support shouldn't be free. But is a broken, laggy, poorly implemented multiplayer experience really woth $30?

Partialy true. But by paying those 30$ you also payed for FUTURE paches (same with Civ3).

Now considering that Firaxis did good job with original Civ3 pachwork (at least IMHO), I assume that after some time you'll get full 30$ worth from PtW.

I the meantime I'm enjoying PtW the way it is, and if you think that buying after several patches is better option then good luck for you. There are always differnces in opinion.

For me even SP part was worth 30$, but for some it isn't.

The bug-fixing in PtW should be free! Bug Firaxis has chosen to abandon the Civ3 players, unless they cough up $30 for future bug-fixes.

Not much bugfixing here. Mostly AI tweaks.

And testing two versions of the game is just too much expensive for small company as Firaxis.
(and they did same thing with SMAC)

By the way, I don't think Firaxis will ever finish PtW (i.e. fix all the bugs and lag in multiplayer). They wouldn't dare make another expansion pack for Civ3, and so there's no incentive to keep the existing community happy.

Considering that Civ3 patchwork was prretty goos, I assume that PtW MP will be fixed too.

And actuly they are considering possibility of making another expansion pack.

[CrONoS]

Player1:
"And actuly they are considering possibility of making another expansion pack."

Make an another Expansion Pack?????? With MP working? Or just new scenario, new mod, new graphics, new AI tweaking? This is official news or just something you think???

Oh yeah, Player1 MOD is great!!!

[woody]

Originally posted by player1
And testing two versions of the game is just too much expensive for small company as Firaxis.

As a customer, I don't really care what the excuses for cutting off support are, I still want support. Now, maybe you can argue that I only deserved support for 9 months (when they released the last Civ3 patch). But, don't argue that I don't deserve support because Firaxis is a small company. That's just backwards thinking.

Considering that Civ3 patchwork was prretty goos, I assume that PtW MP will be fixed too.

I hope your right, for the PtW owners. But just because they got most of the bugs out of Civ3, doesn't mean they'll do the same with PtW. I think there's now less incentive for them to invest the money in bug-fixes (less buyers), and that many of the problems with PtW are basic design flaws and not simple coding errors.

And actuly they are considering possibility of making another expansion pack.

"Civ3: The final ripoff." It sounds like a Monty Python album!

[Mad Bomber]

Folks, let get something straight here. Firaxis is not the one to blame, it is a contract company hired to do the coding for civ 3 and PTW, they get their marching orders from Infograms. PTW problems are almost wholy related to the decisions Infograms has made not Firaxis. PTW was pushed AHEAD of schedule by Infograms and this is the predictable result. They pushed PTW because they are not making their projected revenue and investors are not happy. If infograms does not pull their head out of their arse they will be going the way of Enron.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by woody
I hope your right, for the PtW owners. But just because they got most of the bugs out of Civ3, doesn't mean they'll do the same with PtW. I think there's now less incentive for them to invest the money in bug-fixes (less buyers), and that many of the problems with PtW are basic design flaws and not simple coding errors.

Well, it's impossible to predict what they do. But using your arguments, I would have assumed that Civ3 would never be patched. I mean, the sales of Civ3 did not suddenly soar after the patches. If anything, most of the patches were for the benefit of people who already owned the game. Companies don't sell games by advertising patches; that makes the game sound worse.

Really, there never was any incentive for them to make bug-fixes. If fact, there is probably more incentive to fix PTW than there was Civ3 because PTW potential buyers became wary of the company after Civ3 and may be holding out on buying until patches are released (like me).

As for design flaws, I'm not sure how serious most of the problems in regular Civ3 were, but some of the problems were pretty big. Already, however, Firaxis has shown it has both the means and the will to fix PTW problems because of the patches they have already released.

[woody]

Originally posted by Mad Bomber
Folks, let get something straight here. Firaxis is not the one to blame, it is a contract company hired to do the coding for civ 3 and PTW, they get their marching orders from Infograms. PTW problems are almost wholy related to the decisions Infograms has made not Firaxis. PTW was pushed AHEAD of schedule by Infograms and this is the predictable result. They pushed PTW because they are not making their projected revenue and investors are not happy. If infograms does not pull their head out of their arse they will be going the way of Enron.

I think both Firaxis and Infogrames both share responsibility. After the problems with Civ3, it's shameful that the very same sort of problems (but worse!) happened with PtW. Firaxis had to know this before agreeing to the deal. As for Infogrames, well I do hope they go the way of Enron.

Note that Infogrames is losing money (16 cents per share loss) and their book value is already -$1.64! Yes, they're worth less than nothing, and they're losing even more. How long do you figure they can stay solvent with numbers like that?

[player1]

Originally posted by cronos_qc
Player1:
"And actuly they are considering possibility of making another expansion pack."

Make an another Expansion Pack?????? With MP working? Or just new scenario, new mod, new graphics, new AI tweaking? This is official news or just something you think???

They said (unofficialy) that if PtW is selling well, that they would consider making another XP. And in recent chats they said that PtW is selling well.

Of course this is just lots of speculation.

P.S.
Selling well, means selling in expected number (and that number is suppes to be much lower then for orig. Civ3 since it is an XP)

Originally posted by cronos_qc
Oh yeah, Player1 MOD is great!!!

Thanks!