Boycott Civ 3

[Hoek]

In extension from our unanswered "open letter to Firaxis," where the scenario community was effectively snubbed, I am proposing that anyone who dissapproves of Firaxis not including a decent editor and not providing us any information on future upgrades should simply refuse to buy the game until Firaxis shows at least some consideration of the scenario-making community. Why should I pay fifty dollars on the HOPE that Firaxis will erase their mistakes by providing a bang-up editor. Until they show us a decent editor, we shouldn't give them any money. We need to make it financially risky to push an unprepared product onto the market.

[ComputerEnginee]

since when was an editor part of the main game?

Obviosly, having scenario mods are great but the game in itself is well worth the 50 bucks.

Heck, I'd pay 100 bucks for it without an editor.

And the editor that comes with the game is kicka$$ in terms of editing the game!

Just watch for a patch for them to make an editor for scenario creation. Afterall, the primary goal is to make Civ 3 an addictive game and they've already done that.

[Imran Siddiqui]

One answer: No.

[Hoek]

Well, I wouldn't. What kept my interest in Civ alive this long is that I was able to do alot of creative things with the game. For some reason, Firaxis decided to hamper scenario-making abilities instead, and when I buy games, I buy them to last.

Besides, Imran, when was the last time you made a scenario?

[Trachmyr]

I'm confidant that firaxis will put out a decent editor (although we might have to wait for an expansion pack before we get one that addresses most of our needs)... because the scenario community kept the civ games popular, if they don't release a decent editor I'm sure their future sales of smac2 and civ4 would be hurt (who knows, people might buy stp3 instead )

So, no boycott (besides... I already bought it... the day it came out!)

[techumseh]

Double post.

[techumseh]

Sorry Hoek, I've already bought it. What I find interesting though, is that a number of new posters have suddenly appeared on the boards, singing the praises of Civ3. Now I know there's nothing unusual about that, but take ComputerEnginee for example. (S)he's new today, and has 27 posts so far, posted between 19:07 and 20:50. All are Civ3 BJ's. Someone's working pretty hard to counter the negative reaction of many experinced Civers.

And there are others, too. Maybe they're legit, but maybe they're Anonymous.

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

Originally posted by techumseh
Sorry Hoek, I've already bought it. What I find interesting though, is that a number of new posters have suddenly appeared on the boards, singing the praises of Civ3. Now I know there's nothing unusual about that, but take ComputerEnginee for example. (S)he's new today, and has 27 posts so far, posted between 19:07 and 20:50. All are Civ3 BJ's. Someone's working pretty hard to counter the negative reaction of many experinced Civers.

And there are others, too. Maybe they're legit, but maybe they're: http://www.anonymous1.com (Infrogrames marketing firm for Civ3)

Anonymous is not a marketing firm. They're the web design firm who did the layout for Civ3.com. I highly doubt they're trolling Apolyton.

Dan

[Bakunine]

Originally posted by techumseh
Sorry Hoek, I've already bought it. What I find interesting though, is that a number of new posters have suddenly appeared on the boards, singing the praises of Civ3. Now I know there's nothing unusual about that, but take ComputerEnginee for example. (S)he's new today, and has 27 posts so far, posted between 19:07 and 20:50. All are Civ3 BJ's. Someone's working pretty hard to counter the negative reaction of many experinced Civers.

And there are others, too. Maybe they're legit, but maybe they're: http://www.anonymous1.com (Infrogrames marketing firm for Civ3)

Very interesting...

What does mean BJ's(Civ3 BJ's)?

[David Floyd]

blowjobs of course

Dan...seriously though...what about scenarios? I do understand and respect the decision to concentrate on making the game itself fun and addictive, given your (seemingly) unreasonable time constraints by Infogrames....but on the other hand scenarios and mods really kept Civ2 alive for many people...I dunno if you ever played any scenarios but stuff like Harlan's Middle Earth, or WW2, or maybe John Petroski's Sicily/Italy WW2 scenario, etc, etc, were great...

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

Originally posted by David Floyd
Dan...seriously though...what about scenarios? I do understand and respect the decision to concentrate on making the game itself fun and addictive, given your (seemingly) unreasonable time constraints by Infogrames....but on the other hand scenarios and mods really kept Civ2 alive for many people...I dunno if you ever played any scenarios but stuff like Harlan's Middle Earth, or WW2, or maybe John Petroski's Sicily/Italy WW2 scenario, etc, etc, were great...

David,

While I have no "official" news to report, I can tell you that we do take the needs of scenario and mod builders seriously -- work continues to be done on the editor, and the first patch will bear this out. I can't give you any dates because to my knowledge nothing has been set in stone yet. I know you're all ready to get started, just bear with us.

Dan

[techumseh]

Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS



David,

While I have no "official" news to report, I can tell you that we do take the needs of scenario and mod builders seriously -- work continues to be done on the editor, and the first patch will bear this out. I can't give you any dates because to my knowledge nothing has been set in stone yet. I know you're all ready to get started, just bear with us.

Dan

Glad to hear it Dan. But why does it take a provocative post to get your attention when an attempt at a serious and well thought out appeal gets ignored? Really, the worst thing Firaxis can do now is turtle. Let us know what's planned, what's possible and what's not. We might not be happy, but at least we can respect the fact that you're willing to level with us.

BTW, the 2nd post was supposed to be the edit of the first. My mistake.

[Dan Magaha FIRAXIS]

Originally posted by techumseh


Glad to hear it Dan. But why does it take a provocative post to get your attention when an attempt at a serious and well thought out appeal gets ignored? Really, the worst thing Firaxis can do now is turtle. Let us know what's planned, what's possible and what's not. We might not be happy, but at least we can respect the fact that you're willing to level with us.

BTW, the 2nd post was supposed to be the edit of the first. My mistake.

If you're referring to the "Open Letter... " thread, I can't speak for anyone else, but I was under the impression it was a thread for organizing comments that would be compiled and mailed to someone here. That's why I didn't comment on anything posted to that thread. (Not that my participation in the thread would really have made much of an impact)

When and if I am given further official details I will share them, believe me.


Dan

[techumseh]

But we clearly asked for a response on the thread. I'm concerned about the "when and if" bit also. It would be so much better to get a dialogue going.

[Libertarian]

Firaxis is not the game publisher. Why don't you people take your gang rape and focus it on Infogrames. They're the ones who decided on a release date, not Firaxis.

To refresh your memories, the guys at Firaxis are the ones who are LIKE US. They love gaming. They worked all through the night, night after night, testing and coding their hearts out. People who bash these guys are contemptible trash, in my opinion. I'll give them no quarter.

And the crazy suggestion that Firaxis planted sycophants here is proof positive, as far as I'm concerned, of a profound and disturbing psychosis on the part of the suggesters.

Damn. Just plain damn.

[GodSpawn]

I shall NOT botcott Civ3. I will buy it the instant it becomes available.

You guys that aren't happy with it - get a refund (and a life...)

[Yoleus]

As I said in other posts, I LIKE the game but think it is:
1) rushed: some bugs (artillery, air superiority), some flaws (combat), some missing features (social engineering)
2) balanced in an unpleasant way: corruption&pollution anyone? Nice to play "Sid Meier's Housewife III"
3) marketed to death! No MP and no scenarios. I think they are saving lots of shots for future releases (CivIII MP, Gold, Scenarios, ToT, think of CivII)
4) too conservative: I agree Culture is a lovely inovation (so far), but it is the ONLY one upon CivII (unless you speak graphics...), and sincerely I think we came down from SMAC. It is probably meant this way to be sure to sell: I think CivIII is in SId's -Firaxis'- opinion not a product but a way to gain some money for some more ambitious projects: golf and dinosaurs
4.5) oblivious of suggestion from Poly (this is partially connected to 4, as you guess) that appeared in the FORGOTTEN List. They just did it their way (who cares about the TBS fans? They will play in any case!! So let's work for the main market)

So I will buy the game, but I will wait for Final Gold Patched Mp Scenario Edition, if any. I am not in a hurry to pay or play civIII, I am a fan but I have some "alternatives" (other strategy games, a life, etc.). IMHO Firaxis (and Sid as a playtester) did a nice job, but not an awesome one (so far).

P.S: I did not notice the effect mentioned as "BJ", but anyway, I think this forum has been always over-enthusiastic on Civ-something games (artificially, by "policy", by "paladins" or not, I do not know or care). The real opinions come up only later.

[Rasbelin]

I could support your boycott in theory, BUT...

1. ...I have bought the game already.

2. ...very few people wanted to join my Amazon.com boycott.

3. ...I don't see any reason to do so, if people are also seeing BTC as a waste of time.

So I don't take part in this campaign, but I wish you good luck.

[Skanky Burns]

Originally posted by Libertarian
And the crazy suggestion that Firaxis planted sycophants here is proof positive, as far as I'm concerned, of a profound and disturbing psychosis on the part of the suggesters.

You should have read a thread a few months ago, accusing Dan of making heaps of 'pretend' Civ 3 fan sites, just to fill the links page on civ3.com... That thread was even funnier than this one!!
And thats saying something

Dan: Keep those crop circles coming

[Earthling7]

I will not boycott Civ3.

I know it needs a couple of band-aids, but they are being worked on. As the game is now, it's very good. Patching could make it great and if the expansion is done carefully, it will be awesome.

[MarkG]

i feel like you hoek, after reading your assumption on firaxis' response and Dan's reply

tell you what, get techumseh and the others to set a deadline for people signing the letter, and then mail the letter and the signatures to me, and i'll spam every firaxian e-mail i know with it(well, not really, i'll just mail it once to the proper people )

if we dont get an official answer from firaxis on it, you can start your boycott campaign....

[Solver]

Markos!
Though I remember the StarCraft editor, that was nice!

[techumseh]

Originally posted by MarkG
i feel like you hoek, after reading your assumption on firaxis' response and Dan's reply

tell you what, get techumseh and the others to set a deadline for people signing the letter, and then mail the letter and the signatures to me, and i'll spam every firaxian e-mail i know with it(well, not really, i'll just mail it once to the proper people )

if we dont get an official answer from firaxis on it, you can start your boycott campaign....

Markos, the letter was posted here a week ago. That WAS the message, it was an open letter. Just to be sure, I emailed it a couple of days ago to the contact address on the official site. But I appreciate your response and your offer. Consider the letter closed, as of now. Please convey it officially to Firaxis. And thanks.

[LaRusso]

Originally posted by MarkG
i feel like you hoek, after reading your assumption on firaxis' response and Dan's reply

tell you what, get techumseh and the others to set a deadline for people signing the letter, and then mail the letter and the signatures to me, and i'll spam every firaxian e-mail i know with it(well, not really, i'll just mail it once to the proper people )

if we dont get an official answer from firaxis on it, you can start your boycott campaign....

mark i tried time and again
can you see with firaxis guys where the designers' notes got lost? ceterum censeo....

[Barnacle Bill]

Originally posted by Yoleus
As I said in other posts, I LIKE the game but think it is:
1) rushed: some bugs (artillery, air superiority), some flaws (combat), some missing features (social engineering)
2) balanced in an unpleasant way: corruption&pollution anyone? Nice to play "Sid Meier's Housewife III"
3) marketed to death! No MP and no scenarios. I think they are saving lots of shots for future releases (CivIII MP, Gold, Scenarios, ToT, think of CivII)
4) too conservative: I agree Culture is a lovely inovation (so far), but it is the ONLY one upon CivII (unless you speak graphics...), and sincerely I think we came down from SMAC. It is probably meant this way to be sure to sell: I think CivIII is in SId's -Firaxis'- opinion not a product but a way to gain some money for some more ambitious projects: golf and dinosaurs

I agree with some of this, but not all.

Best I can tell, artillery works fine. You should not be able to destroy ground units with artillery. You can't in real life, at least not on the scale of the Civ games. With the number of units in the game and the fact you have the whole world modelled, a unit is approximately a division. I don't think anybody in history ever destroyed an enemy division solely through artillery bombardment. You can seriously weaken it through artillery bombardment before you attack it, or decimate it as it tries to close if it comes out of cover to attack you, but your front line guys still have to finish the job.

I wish it did have some of the stuff from SMAC, but the way units work in SMAC mitigates strongly against modding, IMO, so I don't miss that.

Corruption & pollution are kind of out of hand. I think corruption can be somewhat address via the "Optinum number of cities(corruption) setting in the World Sizes tab of the rules editor. Unfortunately, I don't think you can do anything about polution, while you could turn it off in Civ2, so that's bad.

Don't care about MP, but the starting point for scenario creation capability should be where Civ2:TOT left off, and add features from there. I'm OK with that not making initial release, though. If we had to wait three more months, that would have two bad effects: #1 I couldn't plat Civ3 for 3 more months (although certain bugs right now are inclining me to wait for the first patch before playing again, but hopefully that's weeks not months), and #2 MOO3 won't release until 3 months after Civ3, so if Civ3 was delayed 3 months I wouldn't get MOO3 for 6 more months.

Not real worried about "too conservative", either. I'm an incrementalist at heart. If I like a game, I want the sequel to make it run on current OS's, update the graphics (where that won't hurt the modding capabilities of the last version, and Civ3 will have gone too far if you can't use bitmasp 2-D units in the final scenario editor), fix gameplay issues from the last version, add cool new features without losing any cool features from the last one, and take advantage of the advances in processors since the last version to make the game "bigger" (more units, more races, bigger maps, better AI, whatever). I don't want them to bring out a "sequel" that is related to the original only by its name and membership in the same genre. Such a game should have a new name, IMO.

[MarkG]

Originally posted by techumseh
Markos, the letter was posted here a week ago. That WAS the message, it was an open letter. Just to be sure, I emailed it a couple of days ago to the contact address on the official site. But I appreciate your response and your offer. Consider the letter closed, as of now. Please convey it officially to Firaxis. And thanks.

if you send it to the askthecivteam mail, it is only for the feature and Dan checks it once per week.

anyway, please send me a mail with the letter and the signatures and i'll forward it

[techumseh]

Done!

[Trifna]

Saying you wont buy the game because it isn't PERFECT is little...
90% of the games on the market do not have editors and aren't even good games (and I don,t buy them...)
I think Firaxis made the right decision. They had on their hands a choice of releasing Civ III early (wadn't all they wanted) and to at least make so we have it and change stuff after. Or, they could have put a release date of 2 or 3 months more for some stuff they could in fact arrange in a patch. Okay, we all agree it's a way that is pretty dependant of a patch, but it was the better that could be made in the situation. They said themselves that they didn't had time to put all they wanted in the editor.

So let's wait Firaxian moves and we'll see...

[Yoleus]

Originally posted by Trifna
Saying you wont buy the game because it isn't PERFECT is little...
90% of the games on the market do not have editors and aren't even good games (and I don,t buy them...)

Hey, I agree! I do not wait for a PERFECT game, I just fixed myself a "gaming budget" probably lower than yours, and being the game a bit conservative I want to save my money for a complete version, that's all!

If CivIII were up to my expectations (some games in the past went beyond) I would buy it soon, but IMHO is "less than awesome", so I wait. I just want to spend my money well

[n.c.]

Well, I returned my Limited Edition copy, so I must be a boycotter.