 |
|  |
 |
|
MarkG
|
|
Grand Lord of Apolyton, Owner of all this land as far as the eye can see
|
|
hey harlan,
good to see you again!
on the editable number of civs: yes, it sounds a lot like ctp, but this isnt activision, where the upper managment takes the people from the team and move on to the next game. smac got much more support that ctp1 and this quote form the interview is encouraging...
We're very proud of the Civ III editors and since these are tools for consumers, we have big plans for allowing these serious mod developers to achieve their goals. This will include dialogues with those developers who have a proven track record or a promising idea, updates to the editors based on ease of use and functionality, and improving the methods of distributing and playing these scenarios
on activision's profits: actually, they made a profit for the first quarter
from our news
Video game publisher Activision on Tuesday reported a small profit for its fiscal first quarter, rather than the loss analysts had expected, and raised its full year estimates due to strong sales, especially for Nintendo's Game Boy Advance
about future interviews: we dont have one scheduled yet. thanks for the suggestions 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Provost Harrison
|
 |
The farce is strong with this one.
Feb 2000 time: 05:14
|
|
Hey, it is nice to see some more information. So there can be 8 civs at once, but kind of room for more, yes? Sounds interesting how this one will develop.
I never had a lot of problems with SMAC myself. The problem I had was when I downloaded the demo on my computer, it just didn't work, full stop. I wrote an email to Firaxis about this giving my computer setup, etc, etc. And low and behold, the full game worked with no problem. I think a lot of existing compatibility issues can be ironed out just after the demo.
The graphics are still under work as well I see. I think the graphics are fine anyway, just need some ironing out...namely the kind of stuff, overlaying tiles, etc. This is what I expected to occur.
Yin is good and eloquent, but sometimes I still get the feeling he is making a mountain out of a molehill. It is impossible to level so much criticism at a game before you have even played it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sabre2th
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Nadexander
Check out the moo3.com web site (which has been up for over 6months even though the game itself wont be released until 2002) Read the many "data dumps" on the page (any one of them is more than all the info the civ team has provided put together) and you'll see that this the real game to take the TBS genre to new heights. It is everything that civ3 is not. Despite the fact that i have been playing civ/civ2/SMAC no stop for the last 6 years, its MOO3 that im really waiting for now. |
MOO3 is completely different from civ is a lot of ways. It's tough to compare them. Some people will flat out not play sci-fi type games and vice versa.
Also -- If MOO3 turns out to be not so great, you'll be incredibly dissapointed. With civ3, realistic people haven't set their hopes too high yet. (yin and followers are also quite below what is realistic in their expectations )
Finally, I'm not saying Firaxis intended to hold info in order to surprise us, but at least we won't (most of us, anyway) have unrealistic hopes for civ3.
quote: After all this silence I expected some kind of annoucemnt, some kind of reassurance that the best was still to come. Unfortunately all we got was that Firaxis has decided that Civ is as good as its ever going to get and doesnt need any improvement (or debugging!) |
Nobody has decided that civ was finished. "Conservative" does not mean they are going to give us a Civ2.1, like with CTP2. This is not Activision. They have also said nothing about bugs or debugging. No public beta does not mean it is unsupported.
quote: Thank you Jeff Morris and Firaxis. You have successfully alienated one of your biggest fans. |
I think it's sad that you're giving up on civ3 without ever seeing or playing it. If you don't buy it, that's your decision, but don't badmouth Firaxis for something you know nothing about. They have worked very hard (I hope) and don't deserve your abuse.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Crouchback
|
|
quote: Originally posted by MarkG
there is always that thing called "demo"..... |
From your mouth to Infogram's ears, cause they are obviously calling the shots now.
David
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Locutus
|
|
ACS CTP1/2 Manager & Civ4 Co-Manager
|
 |
Hengelo, The Netherlands
Nov 1999 time: 06:14
|
|
quote: Originally posted by MarkG
just general descriptions on some of the features. |
Actually, that's really all I need in this case. I mean, Civ3 will still have that f*cked up settler-system to take care of tile improvements, still no decent military system, still that boring old government system, really poorly implemented unique units, no minor civs (it's been too silent to still be really alive) and no city-expansion or other revolutionary ideas. Okay, the resources system sounds nice and culture could be promising but other than that, not much special so far. The details of the few things that *are* in may be worked out very well, but that just makes it a very good Civ2.5 rather than Civ3.
Yes, it is too early to tell and Civ3 will probably fun to play...for a few weeks. Based on all known info, I find it very realistic to assume that it will then probably turn out to be very much like Civ2. And I'm sure others will be very happy to play Civ2(.5) for another 7 years but I was already tired of it 3 years ago. I don't expect to be playing Civ3 very much after those first weeks. I'd rather play CtP2 + MedMod instead, which does fix most of the problems I described above and also has a very well-working AI and diplomacy, something that remains to be seen with Civ3 (and could well turn out to be a lot less customizable, knowing Firaxis).
For the record: with these comments I'm not abusing or attacking Firaxis in any way - and I'm sure yin and others aren't either. (Hell, if you want to see abuse, come visit the CtP forums and read some of the sh*t people spilled over Activision in the past few years.) Criticizing is not badmouthing. I know Firaxis is working very hard to make Civ3 a good game. I simply disagree with them on their 'conservative sequel' approach. Civ3 will almost certainly turn out to be a great game for some people but it will probably never exceed 'nice' for me. Also, I'm a little irritated by the arrogance of some people (including Firaxians) who claim Civ3 will without question be the best Civ game ever; that's simply not true... This irritation may have made some of my posts sound slightly ruder than they were intended.
BTW Hi Harlan, good to see you back! Long time no see. Have you giving up on the Alexander scenario? Haven't heard anything about it in ages...
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
kolpo
|
|
quote: ROFLMAO! Civ2 was a VERY conservative game. If it was released today, we'd call it Civ1.1. Doesn't mean it wasn't good, just didn't change much. Civ3 is a Hell of a lot more change than Civ2 was from Civ. |
Have you ever played civ1 or civ2?
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14. Apolyton Time is 00:14. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|