 |
|
MyOlde
|
|
Haliburton, Ontario, Canada
Jun 1999
time: 05:34
|
|
Why the H are we talking about a Civ IV when we got Conquests only a little while ago? Is it really THAT old? Have we really played it THAT much? I've felt that I was just scratching the surface and that when 1.20 (should have been 2.0 by now!) came along I'd get into the game for real.
Mind you I've been busy with Railroad Tycoon 3 for a few months.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Jarred
|
|
Jesse, I just don't agree with that priority-milking the cash cow; yes, I know its unlikely C3C will make more money than it has now, but Civ 3 is STILL not finished after a few years; of course, it is an open game, but we still need a lot added to this game, and I'm not so sure I want to buy civ 4 at this point, as C3C is not old yet...it just doesn't seem like it should be a high priority yet...I think that this game should be completed, because there's no reason it shouldn't be-the engine is good enough, and there is no need for a Civ 4 yet-this strains our computers enough as is.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
asleepathewheel
|
|
listening too long to one song
Mar 2002
time: 00:34
|
|
yeah, I don't have a top of the line machine like Vmxa1, but max civs on huge is rough.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ducki
|
|
quote:
it just doesn't seem like it should be a high priority yet |
Software development cycles are very, very long. 18months is considered rather short for many types of games.
Consider how long the publicly available beta patch process has been going on. Now extrapolate that timeframe to build an entire game (mostly) from scratch - artwork, research, writing/storylines, etc.
For us C3 players, sure, C4 is not a priority, but for a software development company, once you ship, you have to get cranking on the next title. That's why there's 1, maybe two guys working on the actual patch. There's no real revenue potential in a patch. The marketing machine for C3C is dead, so any effort expended here is for the folks that have already paid for the product. This does not take into account customer attitude/goodwill, but the beancounters are not likely to say "let's hold off on C:IV and really get this other 2-year-old game just right" even if the expansion is fairly new.
To the company(and shareholders) revenue is king and there's no revenue in non-subscription-model old releases. Once the box hits the shelf, they have to already be focusing on the next title or start "cost-cutting measures".
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Rommel2D
|
|
ACS Staff Member / Hosted Site Admin
|
 |
Upper Midwest
Feb 2003
time: 23:34
|
|
I have no idea what the state of the code actually is, but the story goes that Civ3 is built upon the code for SMAC, which is built upon the code for Civ2. All this legacy code is supposedly what makes simple changes like fixing the sub bug or adding new editor features a difficult process likely to mess up other parts of the program. I'd suppose the more whinging (thanks for the new word, Doc :-) about these problems here, the more reason Firaxis has to abandon Civ3 and focus on 4 (written from scratch), since it does actually offer alot of promise to break the deathspiral pattern of buggy code and prolonged beta testing.
Word was a couple weeks ago that after the public patch, the next beta would heavily focus on editor enhancements, but Jesse's post could be read to indicate it isn't a big priority anymore. I don't think its Firaxis that's shooting itself in the foot...
I'm trying not to feed the rumor mill , but krikey, some people are taking his message and drawing alot of conclusions from it.
Follow The Gourd!
No, The Shoe! Follow The Shoe!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sir Ralph
|
 |
Long live teh Schwampel!
Dec 2001
time: 06:34
|
|
Most of us have done so the past 2 1/2 years. We have shown a lot of patience. We are those who were called fanboys two years ago. We didn't leave it, we stuck with the game and tried to make the best out of it. So what's the situation now? Conquests looked promising, when it came out. I thought, just a bit and we have the perfect game. The countrary happened. The game has been ruined with rampant corruption, resource scarcity, the stealth units (which play a big role now in the game and especially the conquests) are completely broken, ditto the units with hidden nationality. I still cannot close the game by using my keyboard, even this is broken.
I don't want to "whinge" (what an atrocious new word that is). All I want is a playable, enjoyable game while waiting for Civ4.
Ah well, I have BG2, NWN and many others. And I'm not really waiting for Civ4 anymore.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MyOlde
|
|
Haliburton, Ontario, Canada
Jun 1999
time: 05:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Willem
Personally, I'm not sure at this point whether I'd be interested in a Civ 4 release. I see so many things now that feel unfinished that I don't think I'd be prepared to hand over any more money on a completely new game. |
I agree with Willem. If Conquests is the end of the line for Civ3 then that's the game I'll stay with. A few new Civs won't cut it for me.
I'd like to add that, while Civ 3 may be described as a 2-year-old game, PTW and Conquests certainly can't be. I got Conquests last October, pretty close to the time it was released. That's a new game as far as I'm concerned. (In the advertising biz, you can call a product "new" for a year.) If they want to plow ahead with Civ 4, fine, but someone should be left in the shop to make sure the original works as advertised.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
14-03-2004 17:03
|