So... will there be an "events.txt" or scenario triggers made soon?

x Krelian x · February 6, 2003, 02:12

My ideas are just waiting to get out, but I need an events.txt!!!!!

So?

alva · February 6, 2003, 07:24

nope, and don't expect it happen ever..consider this a non-event

Alex · February 6, 2003, 09:06

you better wait for Civ4.

x Krelian x · February 6, 2003, 15:08

Aaarrgghh!!!!

*makes scenario with Civ 2*

Nubclear · February 6, 2003, 16:20

Quote:

Originally posted by x Krelian x
*makes scenario with Civ 2*

Civ2 superiority proven once again

Maquiladora · February 6, 2003, 17:24

Not just a let down for scenario makers but also for the people who wouldve played all these great scenarios. Firaxis mustve been in a rush or somethin surely.

Centauri18 · February 6, 2003, 20:53

Ugh. I am so sick of people talking about how much better Civ2 is. I like Civ3 better.

kentonio · February 6, 2003, 21:19

Civ3 is a better actual game but you can hardly argue with scenario makers who are distressed that tools they used for years in civ 2 were not available to them in civ 3? I personally couldnt go back to civ 2 now despite its amazing toolset but that doesnt mean that the extremely limited scope of civ 3's editor doesnt drive me crazy.

Kentonio

Peter Triggs · February 6, 2003, 21:39

Quote:

you better wait for Civ4.

OTOH, if you're interested in programming and not overly fussy about the genre you're working in, Rise of Nations will be out on April 22. It will come with a scripting language (See this thread) and, from the look of things, it's modifiability will be very user-friendly. Here's a quote from an interview with Thunder (the BHG community relations person) that was released today:

Quote:

Q: RoN Center
Will you have support for game modders?
A: Graham 'Thunder' Somers
The way our game is designed, it is incredibly easy to mod. Virtually every statistic in the game (how fast various units move, turn, attack, etc) is written up in XML files, which are easily edited. People will have the ability to open up a number of XML documents and not only view the stats, but also change them to whatever values they wish.

Q: RoN Center
How easy is the editor to use?
A: Graham 'Thunder' Somers
Our scenario editor is quite user friendly, especially on a basic map editing level. There is a very cool time saving feature which allows you to pop up what it essentially a mini-map (only slightly larger) and use it to paint in different terrains and have those changes reflected on the actual map. It is great for getting the major editing done quickly. The example given by programmer Scott Lewis during our Fanstock event was painting in the water of the Mediterranean Sea to form the boot of Italy via the mini-map. It took him a fraction of the time to do it at that level, and he got a great overview of the map while he was working.

For those who want to take things further, and really create a large in-depth campaign, the scenario editor has a scripting language that will allow fans to do some fantastic things, such as create branching campaigns. For example, if a player loses scenario A, he will then play scenario C, or if he wins A, he plays scenario D instead. You can also have players start scenarios with whatever units they had left at the end of the previous scenario. There really is a lot of potential for creative design with our editor, and we are all really excited to see what people come up with.

Q: RoN Center
Will the editor be full featured?
A: Graham 'Thunder' Somers
It certainly does have all of the bells and whistles of editors available in other RTS games. The team's experience on games like Civilization II showed how great it was to support the mod community. In addition to the standard RTS editor functions that we support, we've added a lot of new twists and triggers to the scripting language that should allow players to create all kinds of new situations

Master Zen · February 6, 2003, 23:49

In Civ2 it anyone with even a passing capability to make graphic files could make some damn good scenarios. With Civ3's use of heavily animated FLIC files this is more difficult for the average usuer, maybe for this reason Firaxis decided Civ3 wasn-t made to be so scenario-friendly.

Still, i believe the REAL reason is they were just too darn lazy to do it. I still don't understand why they wasted time doing so many units in PTW (the WW2 and Japanese units) yet will leave without implementing a decent scenario editor with events.

Made the cereal. Left out the milk.

Rather stupid if you ask me. Maybe infogrames had something to do with it. I tend to find more fault with evil-greedy-corporate slimeball-publisher than the game maker. But that's just me.

Anyway, I hope Firaxis reconsiders and makes an events editor in a future patch, even if we have to wait 6 months for it, it'll be worth it since Civ4 will probably not come out anytime before 2005.

Unconquered · February 7, 2003, 14:46

In a nutshell Master Zen, they realized that they could sell their P.O.S. Expansion Patch without some extras... i.e- make it look like we did a bunch of work (user maps, extra units etc.) with no quality control (just look at some of the maps, not mine of course though it is good

) and sell it for $30. Maximum profit/minimum work. The bad side of capitalism is when greed effects quality. Pretty lame for the price Firaxis!

Unconquered · February 7, 2003, 14:54

Smoke and Mirrors is the name of the game...

WarpStorm · February 7, 2003, 15:39

Unconquered, would you have wanted anyone to change your map before including it and then saying it was your work?

Firaxis didn't change or knowingly misrepresent anyone's maps or mods that they included. The released them as the the original authors designed them. Blame the mod makers here and at CFC for not doing good work if you don't like it.

Now Infogrames cut the graphics out of a few when it sent to duplication because they thought that there were copyright infringement issues.

Unconquered, I think that you complain just to complain.

x Krelian x · February 7, 2003, 16:06

I say we riot.

Rabble rabble!

Master Zen · February 7, 2003, 18:45

Quote:

Originally posted by x Krelian x
I say we riot.

Rabble rabble!

I AGREE!!!

Unconquered · February 7, 2003, 22:04

I am asking for quality control warpstorm. Nothing less should be expected for a $30 price tag.

SuperSlinky · February 7, 2003, 22:21

Quote:

Originally posted by WarpStorm Unconquered, I think that you complain just to complain.

I don't think you are being fair, Warpstorm. There are many justifiable criticisms that could be leveled at Civ III. When I bought Civ III, I expected more, but all I got was more of the same. Sure the graphics are better than Civ II, the interface is nicer, and they cleaned up a few messy game issues. But let's face it: we all wanted a quantum leap forward like we got going from going form Civ I to Civ III, and we didn't get it. By and large, it is the same game we had been playing for several years. We still don't get to go to Alpha Centauri and start a new world, we don't get any futuristic units and technologies, and the basic way the game plays and unfolds isn't that much different. We are stuck with the same moronic combat model, we are still farming the same 21 squares, and we are building the same improvements that do pretty much what they did before. Sure they changed some things like reshuffling units and government types, but who cares about that? All that is arbitrary anyway. It is almost like they rearranged the furniture and called it a new house.

Then along comes PTW to add insult to injury. We pay 2/3 the price of the original game and not one of the above criticisms was addressed. After all this time we get buggy multi-player which was promised in a free patch, we get some incomplete user created stuff that can and should be downloaded from the Internet, a few new unit graphics along with a warning that adding new units is not officially supported, and a few enhancements that don't begin to justify calling this thing an expansion. Yeah, I know, MP is much better with the patch. But if we are expected to download large patches that are vital to game function, then why did they bother to include user created mods that are just as easy to get off the Internet? The answer is self-evident: it was filler, plain and simple, designed to dupe the ignorant. But who do they think they are fooling? Is there anyone nerdy enough to play Civ III who doesn't have some sort of Internet access? I'm sure there ar a few kids living out in the woods somewhere who fit the bill, but they sure went to a lot of trouble to impress this non-existent minority while insulting the intelligence of the vast majority of us who know better. I think the least they could have done with PTW is give us an expansion that was worthy of that title after giving us such a no-frills Civ III in the first place.

WarpStorm · February 8, 2003, 00:28

SuperSlinky, show me one website, posting, print articly, chat-log, or anything that can credibly be shown that Firaxis or Infogrames promised free MP in a patch. I've never seen this and I've looked. I don't think it was ever promised.

Why would Civ3 go into the future? That has never been Sid's thing at all (SMAC was Brian's brainchild and he is an avid science fiction reader, Sid loves history).

If you change the things that make Civ, Civ (21 squares, combat models, etc.) then those fans that enjoy them will complain. They can't please everyone, they decided to please themselves.

Show me a quote that says adding units is not supported. There's even a button to do it. In fact the license expicitly says that you can mod PTW.

Who are they duping by including user created mods? It wasn't even advertised on the box. It is filler. It's including mods and maps that most Civ3 players would never have seen before.

Believe it or not, most of the over a million Civ3 players have never been to the major Civ3 sites and aren't aware of these mods. This site has around 25000 members (not all of them Civ3 players or active anymore).

WarpStorm · February 8, 2003, 00:41

Quote:

Originally posted by Unconquered
I am asking for quality control warpstorm. Nothing less should be expected for a $30 price tag.

First off, I apologize for implying that you are a whiner. I was wrong.

I agree that PTW was released in a buggy state. It was rushed out to duplication before Firaxis was even told about it.

Second, you act as if this is a lot of money. ???

Back to my original statement, what would you have wanted Firaxis and Infogrames to do to QC your mod before including it? Think hard, David. Is it perfect? Would you have wanted someone else to 'fix' it. Would they have had your vision of what you wanted? Or would you rather that they included it as you released it? I know which I would for my mods.

Unconquered · February 8, 2003, 10:51

Part of my problem is that I took my map seriously, even though it isn't perfect and I expected other civ map makers to do the same, and some did. But there is some really bad maps that shouldn't have been included. I think it brings the overall quality of the product down. Your right the $30 is not going to break most peoples bank account, but that is not the point. I don't feel like it was a $30 improvement over vanilla civ III, and the "filler" just makes it look like the product wasn't taken seriously. That, along with the fact that you can't write a serious scenario, just adds insult to injury. Don't include extra units, without the ability to produce realistic scenarios for those units. Their time could have been better spent. Thanks for the apology, but I do complain... just not for complaining sake.