I've finally played Civ3 to death

woody · November 11, 2002, 11:34

After owning Civ3 for more than a year, and playing it many, many, many, many, many times, I can honestly say I've played the game to death.

I have always been a big supporter of Civ3, but after reading all the horror stories about bugs in the new release, I don't think I'll ever be buying it. Firaxis really has to learn how to release playable games on the 1st release. Minor bugs I can accept, but their 1st releases are always unplayable.

Apart from that, I really don't think the new release is worth it. I have no desire to play a Civ-like game as multiplayer (way to long!), and the other things added in the new release seem like a simple patch.

That said, the original Civ3 (after the bugs were fixed) was certainly money well spent.

I've now bought a Playstation 2 for other games. PC's are great for strategy, but action games are too awkward to play with a mouse and keyboard. (Although 1st person shooters benefit greatly from a mouse.)

I'll likely delete Civ3 from my hard drive. Perhaps I'll come back to it next year. I played Civ1 and Civ2 on and off for years, and Civ3 will probably be no different.

If I ever buy another Firaxis game, I'll never preorder it. I'll wait 3-6 months until they get most of the bugs worked out.

I don't want to sound like a troll, but why is it that console (Playstation, etc.) games work right out of the box, while PC games often are full of bugs? I'm not talking about hardware compatibility bugs, I'm talking about basic game-play bugs (like fighters not working in the 1st release of Civ3)!

ChaotikVisions · November 11, 2002, 15:02

Er, if you were going to buy PtW solely for internet mp i'd wait and make sure patches come out. If you were getting it just for sp or even for sp too, i'd buy it. The sp of PtW as far as i've seen is without bugs and working great. AIs been tweaked, the new civs/units/improvements are nice as well. Its not just a "simple" patch, makes the game even more enjoyable for me. Anyway, its your money. Oh, and thanks for keeping us up to date on your gaming purchases.

player1 · November 11, 2002, 15:56

The thing with PtW is that it's probably not good enough for casual gamer who doesn't play MP.

For hard-core fan SP improvements are enough.

For casual player who likes MP, PtW would be OK too, if patched.

For me, just ability to play Hotseat is worth of full price.

aahz_capone · November 11, 2002, 16:42

SMAC was a firaxis game and it was hella well rounded. I don't remember it being this much trouble on the boards at all. It still is better rounded than civ3SP IMHO, but hey, it has the age of experience.

I unfortunately never played SMAC on MP (sci-fi civ fans are fewer the oother civ fans so it's hard to find good people and I only just got a network) so I never had a chance to compare that to civ3MP.

Oh, well...

vmxa1 · November 11, 2002, 16:50

No Brian Reynolds.

H Tower · November 12, 2002, 01:03

don't let the door hit you in the ass on your way out, AKA, come post in the OTF

werdhertz · November 12, 2002, 03:38

i hope you burn to death in your house with a fire caused by the ps2

werdhertz · November 12, 2002, 03:40

and then i hope you come back here and continue to contribute to the civ3 strategy forum!

Jon Shafer · November 12, 2002, 03:53

Quote:

Originally posted by woody
I don't want to sound like a troll, but why is it that console (Playstation, etc.) games work right out of the box, while PC games often are full of bugs? I'm not talking about hardware compatibility bugs, I'm talking about basic game-play bugs (like fighters not working in the 1st release of Civ3)!

Publishers are more tolerant to release dates with video games, because they know there will be no patches. With any computer game, you can easily release a patch and numerous problems can be fixed with a simple download. If a video game has major problems, that's how it's gonna be from first disc to last.

However, very rarely do games ever have the problems that Civ 3 had (has). Like vxma said, Brian Reynolds leaving Firaxis and going off on his own (RoN anyone?) really hurt the development process of Civ 3, cutting many things out to approach the original release date was necassary. PTW's problems stem from that along with a short amount of time to get the thing working properly, and Infogrames forcing GameSpy upon Firaxis (Infogrames required them to use it).

woody · November 12, 2002, 14:24

No, I don't think Civ3's initial bugs were due to BR leaving Firaxis. I bought Civ2 when it first came out, and it was unplayable with all the bugs it had. However, BR was very quick about releasing patches... I think there were several within the first couple of weeks.

I think the problem is with the development process Firaxis uses. They just never test basic gameplay! We're stuck having to be their beta-testers.

Kingof the Apes · November 12, 2002, 19:04

The only game that compares to Civ 3 and PTW when they first came out is Myth 3. At least they are supporting Civ 3 with more patches.

Demerzel · November 12, 2002, 19:40

It is sadly true that because PC games can be patched, the publishers/developers will often release early before proper testing knowing they can patch if necessary.

Almost wish PC were like consoles and had to rely on the released version. Yes we'd no doubt have to wait longer BUT as we seemingly have delay after delay, what's another month or two after a six month delay? Better another wait and finished, then out early and bugged.

Can't really see people accepting a PS2/XBOX/GC game which crashes whilst running for the first/second/nth time, whereas people will accept that for PC games. Not sure why we tolerate it tbh. Nor why we slate people so who don't tolerate it and speak out against it. Yes of course configurations of PC's are far more diverse than the standard console where you can work to tailor your product. However, a long testing period will remove a heck of a lot of bugs from your product, as I know from working in the games industry.

It just seems to come down to the fact that they know we'll accept "shoddy" workmanship for PC games ( as long as we get patchs ) and so they'll give us it whereas console owners won't and so they don't get it. Maybe a little simplistic in answer but a grain of truth nonetheless I'm sure.

TheHobbit · November 12, 2002, 21:47

But don't get all over the PC developers. A lot of it might be their fault, but you have to give them a break. Console developers have one thing to develop for, one specific console with specific hardware and setup. A PC has many many many configurations and tons of possible hardware. While console games only have to fix problems with one type the reliability of code with one PC to another varies greatly.

redstar1 · November 13, 2002, 05:26

True.... but there is the argument that Direct-x and/or OpenGL take a lot of the work away from the developer.....

I would suggest its because PC games tend to be more complex and generally a lot 'bigger'.

Of course there is also the culture of 'what does it matter, we can fix it later' which is impossible on the consoles. A good example of a publisher that treat consumers with respect is Microsoft. Look at the quality of games they release and look at how relatively 'bugless' the games are. I own quite a few titles published by Microsoft and have never had to patch any one of them.

TacticalGrace · November 13, 2002, 06:23

Wow! Someone saying something good about microsoft!

You're absolutely right though redstar, microsoft games do seem to work out of the box.

georges bonbon · November 13, 2002, 06:49

Sadly but true about the bugs in CIVIII.

But what about the bugs with Microsoft (98/2000/Me)?

I have now installed XP for 2 months and it has only crashed once.

With all other OS it is was nearly daily.

Oh by the way with Microsoft products they do not talk about patches but about upgrades..........................

A fanboy

Demerzel · November 13, 2002, 08:25

You're right about Microsoft games being great straight out of the box. For the Age of Empires/Age of Kings games they worked just fine in pretty much every aspect.

Very impressive work from Ensemble studios & Microsoft on how to develop, test, publish & release a game to both their own profit and our pleasure. Makes quite a change really from the normal cut-throat, profit obsessed and consumer hostile publishers out there. Maybe they should think about the fact that when you annoy your consumers they often don't buy from you again, which often screws up your profits.

As someone above said, who'd have thought we'd be saying nice things about Microsoft? Guess as long as they are kept away from the coding aspect all is fine, it's only when they are allowed near the keyboards we need to worry

woody · November 13, 2002, 16:39

Quote:

Originally posted by TheHobbit
But don't get all over the PC developers. A lot of it might be their fault, but you have to give them a break. Console developers have one thing to develop for, one specific console with specific hardware and setup. A PC has many many many configurations and tons of possible hardware. While console games only have to fix problems with one type the reliability of code with one PC to another varies greatly.

I can understand bugs with hardware incompatibility, but I just don't think that basic gameplay bugs are acceptable.

I already mentioned the example of fighters not working in the 1st release of Civ3. That's just sloppy testing. It took them several fixes and almost a year to release a decent working version of Civ3. Now, they've gone back to sloppy releases with PtW (from what I've read).

I think Firaxis's development process is flawed. I hear they don't even test in-house... it's shipped off to the publisher for testing. WTF???

But, as someone else already mentioned, PC game development can be done right. Microsoft seems to handle it fine.

Civ3 is worth the money. But, I've been put off from ever buying another Firaxis game when it's first released. I'll be sure to wait 6 months to a year, until the bugs are fixed. Is this really what Firaxis wants its customers to do? They're losing reputation, and will be out of business if they don't smarten up.

It seems that most PC game development companies don't "get the message" until it's too late. Since Firaxis spun off from Microprose, you'd think they would have learned! I guess not.

Spiffor · November 14, 2002, 01:18

Firaxis has very little money, and is only a part in the making of the game. They're specialized in developing, and they don't have other services required in a game :
- If you knew Libertarian, you know they don't have a PR department

.
- They have a QA department, but it's true they hired betatesters afterciv3 came out (they betatested PtW)
- They have to follow the orders of the publisher, which basically gives them the money. Unfortunately, Infogrames has big financial problems, and I assume it explains why they rushed twice this licence.

Chemical Ollie · November 14, 2002, 07:11

Is there a modpack that adds new tribes similar to PtW? The expansion has not yet reached Sweden and I doubt that I will buy it when it does. Multiplayer CIV would not be accepted by my family, as I would not be able to leave the computer for hours. Thus, I'm only after the extra tribes.

I looked for a modpack at this site but only found single civs that were posted almost a year ago.

aahz_capone · November 14, 2002, 08:09

I agree with hobbit that the time taken to develope for a PC (because of the many configurations) is a factor that makes console games relatively bugless. Also for consoles the only way to test IS in house testing. But as you say game features which have nothing to do with hardware, well thats a shame.

But for those being warry of buying another FIRAXIS game, just remember SMAC. I'm sure BR's leaving did have a big effect (I think mostly in little things like a civlopedia with no descriptions of sciences, sciences without anything useful, airbases and those things which come with experience), but I also heard that Sid didn't have as much to do with civ3 as he did with civ1,2.

Maybe in the distant future Big Huge Games and Firaxis will make a dual developement sponsored by Microsoft? That would be nice...

woody · November 14, 2002, 11:01

Quote:

Originally posted by Spiffor
Unfortunately, Infogrames has big financial problems, and I assume it explains why they rushed twice this licence.

I didn't realize that, but yes, it looks like they have serious problems:

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=IFGM&d=t

http://biz.yahoo.com/rc/021113/tech_infogrames_1.html

Has Firaxis always been teamed up with Infogrames? If so, that may explain some of their quality problems. Although, they seem to have carried over many bad habits from their former days at Microprose.

Jon Shafer · November 14, 2002, 13:31

Infogrames essentially 'bought' the Civ license and the Firaxis dev team from Microprose, so yes, Firaxis has always been stuck with Infogrames since the days of Microprose.

Falconius · November 14, 2002, 16:09

Quote:

Originally posted by woody
I've finally played Civ3 to death

I figure I'm good at least through Civ VIII.