 |
|
codemast01
|
|
The only reason we are letting Firaxis know how lousy we think their initial release is, is because we all hope they will fix it. Although hope and confidence in Firaxis is difficult to justify after seeing how buggy Civ III is. However I believe Firaxis deserves a second chance. Now that they are not bound by any deadline, hopefully they can finishing coding Civ III.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Herder
|
|
Back when I first started playing computer games I was hooked. I have been playing PC games since Starflight 1 and Empire (Civ is actually a derivative of this fine game). Played a null modem version of multiplayer Command HQ written by Dani Bunten back in the early 90's.
Sure the graphics were somewhat crude by todays standards but the gameplay was rock solid and I never needed to patch. Ever. The first real disappointing release of a game that required patching to enjoy was Outpost by Sierra. That was the turning point in the software industry in my opinion.
Games made before Outpost were complete. The content was all there and nothing else was needed because the product was pure and not dumbed down for the "kiddiez".
The creation of the internet has allowed game companies to be lax about quality because they use this medium to deliver the actual product.
What we buy nowadays isn't a finished product. Its a sad but practical fact that gaming companies are market driven now and part of the mainstream source of modern day entertainment.
Fan sites hype the game, tease you and bring out the legions of fanbois screaming buy buy buy. You buy the game, typically unreturnable and are promised a patch "later".
Thats sorta messed up.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sikander
|
 |
Boulder, Colorado, United Snakes of America
Jan 2000 time: 22:16
|
|
I don't share your faith in Fireaxis. They did not produce the earlier Civ games that you loved, but they did produce Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri which is IMO the best Civ type game ever produced. It was a really bold leap in terms of game play, with a lot of wonderful (and a few pathetic) graphics. voiceovers, etc. A very complicated game, which required quite a few bug fixes. As long as SMAC and it's sequel were selling at full price Fireaxis would put out an occaisional patch to fix some of the bugs. As soon as the game sales went down (late 1999 IIRC) that was it, no more patches, nothing, even though there were huge numbers of bugs identified and yet to be eradicated.
Now considering the fact that SMAC seems obviously to have been a bigger project to produce in terms of artwork and scope (tons of new and interesting things to code rather than a simplified Civ 2 like Civ 3 is), I wonder just how much of an investment in after release support for Civ 3 will Fireaxis be able to justify to it's owners?
This is why it is unacceptable for a software company to release something as unfinished as Civ 3. I can understand it when unexpected hardware configurations can screw up a program, but when whole aspects of the game simply do not work on any platform? Didn't they play test enough to get aircraft? The answer is of course they did. They probably knew about most of the problems we see on these forums before release, but they simply ran out of time / money. So they broke their contract with their customers by selling something that did not exist yet, namely a game that works more or less as advertised. They know that we are a good deal less likely to sue them than Infogrames is if they don't get their infinished product out in time for Christmas.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16. Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|