 |
|
ErikM
|
|
It is Firaxis' priorities that I find somewhat puzzling.
For months, since C3C came out, people complain about invisible sub bug, resource scarcity, new corruption model (Ok I'll concede it might be a feature) etc.
For years, since Civ3 came out, people complain about interface problems, like no ability to gang-terraform and getting 12 "Are you sure" popups from domestic advisor when you want to irrigate grassland mined in Despotism.
Now, did you hear anyone complain about the Radio tech?
Why fix what's not broken instead of fixing what is broken?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
alexman
|
 |
Hunt Valley, MD
Jan 1970
time: 00:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Doc
1) Fix the annoying bugs, with the sub bug only being the poster child.
|
Agreed 100%. Fortunately, there are not too many of these left. Two others I can put in that category are that the Scientific Golden Age doesn't work properly, and that war weariness is not calculated properly for all players but the first.
quote:
2) Reinstate the AI tweaks that PTW had. Why are these gone? Why does the AI irrigate grassland in despotism? Why does it space its cities even worse than ever? Why are the barbs such wussy pink blouse wearing girls? I have more.
|
Agreed again! IMO as important as the previous point. By the way don't forget the biggest AI regression of them all: it no longer uses leaders to build Armies!
quote:
3) Decide whether resource scarcity is a bug or a feature. If the first state when it will be fixed.
|
OK, although this is easily moddable, and balanced either way, IMO. Not nearly as important as the first two points.
quote:
4) Some fixable balance issues are evident. I'm not talking about major changes to what has always been a rubbish govt system, or anything like that. I just mean balancing the traits a little better. For goodness sake nerf the seafaring sink probability in ocean and sea. For god's sake take something away from agricultural, maybe no cheap aqueducts. For god's sake let's have a reasonable anarchy time (though this wont fix the govt system). I have more.
|
Very important! Weaken the Seafaring and Agricultural Traits! Reduce Anarchy time! And I would add one more: Balance the govenments! (boost Feudalism and Fascism, and nerf Communism and Republic a bit).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Theseus
|
 |
The warmonger formerly known as rpodos. Gathering Storm! Apolyton Spirit!!
Apr 2002
time: 00:34
|
|
Did I mention Marine+Berserk Armies? 
Good calls, Doc (still can't get over that you are DrSpike... the first week or saw I was reading your posts, I was like "Damn, this guy knows what he's talking about, where did he come from?  ).
Again, while there is some frustration, I say give Jesse a break, and let's all help him as much as we can. Business models and practices aside, this here situation is what it is... we are lucky enough to have some enthusiasts on the development side, and they need all the forebearance, leeway, and assistance that we can provide.
Thanks again, Jesse! 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
ErikM
|
|
Don't remind me of Civ III the way it came out from the box in 2001 Interceptors don't work, no group movement, coastal fortresses don't work, corruption completely broken, pop rushing broken, even unit cycling algorithm completely broken. Don't see how it was any better than an EU/HoI... So in an unpatched EU2 Byzantines always defeated Ottomans within the first ten years, Spanish AI refused to colonize South America, and Papal States consistently supported Reformation... Methinks Firaxis would not even try to fix such minor details
Then the first Civ patch came out and instead of fixing some glaring problems it introduced "team color disc" and "city population dropshadow". After that I seriously considered using my Civ 3 CD as a frisbee and, needless to say, didn't play it until some enthusiasts have convinced me that Civ III was really improved after some patching.
Well, improved it was but coastal fortresses still don't work Not to mention some other requested features. Meanwhile, Paradox steadily fixed pretty much all glaring problems in their games. EU2 is 3 years old by now, but they still patch it based on players requests...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sir Ralph
|
 |
Long live teh Schwampel!
Dec 2001
time: 06:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by alexman
OK, although this is easily moddable, and balanced either way, IMO. Not nearly as important as the first two points. |
True, it is easily moddable. The annoying part here is, that Firaxis obviously doesn't count it as bug, but as feature. The lack of any statement about that issue proves this. Otherwise it would have taken five minutes to adjust the appearance ratios in the standard scenario file to Krings recommendations and could have been included pronto in every beta patch.
And no, it is not balanced. In MP, it is an annoyance. In SP, the AI will always suffer. It doesn't lead to killer AIs, as some strategists believe. It leads to killer humans. The AI won't wage wars for resources. The human will. Always.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Andydog
|
 |
London
Jan 2001
time: 05:34
|
|
Well, I've tried to see things positively since Conquest's initial release, but like others around here I am struggling to continue to do so.
Jesse states that the sub bug remains because fixing it broke the game in other areas - a result of re-using the SMAC engine, which was re-used from the Civ2 engine.
Firstly, why was this old engine not fully understood by the programming team, and fine tuned to run properly? I admit I'm not a programmer, and imagine that this could take a lot of time, but for heaven sakes - clearly this is a basic and essential step that would not only save huge amounts of time in the future but would also vastly reduce the risks of future 'broken sub' type bugs. Why wasn't it taken when the development team changed? 
Secondly, why has Friaxis left it up to just one poor soul to try to iron out the critical bugs and game balance issues that remain post release? Heck - Jesse isn't even a developer, yet he has to do his best pick this pigs ear up and run with it in his own spare time.
The post-release support for PTW was good, but clearly this was only because they knew they would be releasing another expansion. Now that it has been released and they have all our hard earned money, I'm sorry, but I’m not going to accept that one person (who isn't even a developer and who isn't even given sufficient time and resources to develop), be considered 'post release support'.
Thirdly, the whole management of patching has been poor. Time and money is clearly limited but critical bugs and game balance issues were not prioritised. Why was ‘worker gangs’ being worked on when, for example, the AI can’t even build armies?
Fourthly, there doesn't appear to be any formal processes in place for deciding upon and locking down basic game mechanics. I’m sorry, but you don’t for example suddenly decide to introduce a new “less streaky” combat system post release with a patch knowing that you don’t have the time or money to properly test it to ascertain the effects on game balance. If you’re going to do that then what was the point of the extensive beta testing pre-release? I also don’t understand why patch 1.12, 1.13, etc was released to the community for us to test corruption and provide feedback, when you then completely ignore all the feedback and do what you were going to do anyway.
My hopes for Civ4 have almost completely faded. An organisation that is not prepared to ensure the development team has what it needs to finish the product is not an organisation I would place hope in for decent future products. A development process that is not controlled is not a development process that can produce a balanced tested game free of major bugs. A team that can't understand and get an old engine up to scratch is not a team that can build a better engine.
I’d love to be proven wrong in all this – Civ is the only game I play – all the others just don’t interest me. I felt very let down with CTP, and I now feel let down with Civ3.
I'm sorry this post is so negative - I hate to rant and realise it has an almost zero chance of actually doing any good, but even so, it's off my chest now and out there, and even if there is a small chance that Friaxis will take note, then great.
It may not sound like it, but I do enjoy conquests immensely. I think that in general it's better than PTW, and that it's the best of the civ type genre that you can get. But while I play, I find myself shaking my head at how it fell short of it’s true potential because of the above issues.
I guess that if Friaxis gave Jesse the time and resource to get the things that Doc mentioned above sorted, then my faith may be restored somewhat, but just I don’t think that that’s gonna happen.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:34
|
|
Andydog:
One of Civ3's main problems is that half of the developing team (the one which followed Brian Reynolds, designer of SMAC) left Firaxis halfway of the development. Instead of cancelling the game outright, Firaxis decided to go on with new staff. It made Civ3 definitely more shaky, especially with Atari / Infogrames ordering to rush the game.
Now, I'm not even sure Jesse was in the original team as Civ3 came out. The lead programmer (and AI master) was Soren Johnson, and the editor main programmer was Mike Breitkreuz.
In such circumstances, it is no wonder the obsolete code is confusing. I'd hope Firaxis would bring back the old staff in the patching team, so that patches could proceed more efficiently. However, I don't hold my breath: business is business, and Atari needs a money C3C can't bring in anymore (save for the definitive "Gold Version" of the game including Civ3 + both expansions). Civ4 is their best bet for a blockbuster, and it is also the chance for Firaxis to restore its reputation. There's no wonder they focus all their resources into making Civ4 the best possible game.
|
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-03-2004 20:34
) and I'd give you a 10 times more balanced game. 
|
|