 |
| |
|
|
gachnar
|
 |
Arlington, VA
Nov 2001
time: 00:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Libertarian
I was told by a Firaxis employee to ask Jeff. I asked Jeff.
|
In the real world: You were told that only Jeff would know the answer. Not that he would tell you, since you were also told that Firaxis wasn't going to share speculation about future features. You were also told that they had already heard requests for stacked movement.
quote:
He said that he would answer whenever he felt like it.
|
In the real world: He said he would give you information when they had reliable information. Apparently he doesn't have reliable information about when or if it will be implemented. He answered your question. And he showed a surprising amount of tact compared to the post you asked the questions in.
quote:
I said that I would extend him the same treatment in recommending the game to my friends.
|
In the real world: You tried to threaten him by saying you'd tell your friends that they shouldn't buy Civ3 because some people have problems with it. Seems more like you threatened your friends. If they would enjoy the game, why not tell them about it? I enjoy the game even without stacked movement or an optimized algorithm to select next available units. Hell, I even enjoy my spearmen putting down 4 knights.
quote:
If I had treated my customers that way, I wouldn't still have a business. [...shrug...] Maybe it's a Southern thing. We don't think courtesy is a waste of time.
|
In the real world: Apparently you do. You have shown very little in that top post there. Apparently, you are supposed to insult them, they are supposed to show courtesy. Well, in the Mid-Atlantic we like to do that whole "mutual respect between client and customers" thing. Try it.
quote:
What Jeff did exactly was to waste time. His. Mine. And yours. His rude brush-off was uncalled for.
|
In the real world: Yes. He wasted his time. He's a developer. He's not paid to answer your questions. He does this because he actually cares, but he has to balance his job against your desire for unofficial information. His "rude brush-off" was probably a direct result of your arrogant and somewhat insulting tone.
quote:
It went from "it's not my job" to "bug off". Yin is right. They don't know PR from BS. |
In the real world: Well. This one one of the few statements thats somewhat true. I would say they are "mediocre" at PR. Really, what are they thinking. They keep on acting like developers. Why cant we have a game created by marketroids? Then we would have some good PR, and I bet you would have got that perfect response.
{edit: Eeek. Spelling}
Last edited by gachnar on 19-12-2001 at 02:14
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Libertarian
|
|
quote:
Priorities are important if you're running a business. |
A business's first priority ought to be to its shareholders.
quote:
now you're acting like a whiner Lib. What he really said was that he would answer when he would be able to give you a concrete answer |
We'll see.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Golgo13
|
|
I have to agree with Lib on stacked movement. I'm not a programmer by trade, but I do know from playing CTP2 that stacked movement can be done. I also know that no stacked movement in Civ3 is a pain in the posterior and it should have been included in the original release not a patch. Oz you really need to shut up. I've read many of your posts on this thread and others. All you do is blast others for speaking their mind. I think it's obvious that many of the criticisms of Civ3 are logical and reasonable. What do you have to offer to these forums besides hot air?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dida
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Steve Clark
Lib, I am curious, what answer would have been ideal for you? Would you prefered Jeff to say that the problem has been fixed in the code and it will be released in a minor patch on Friday? How do you know it could be this simple?
I have programmed indexing "units" on a grid and it is difficult. When the "unit" is created, it is assigned an ID pointer. Part of the information about that unit is it coordinate location, which obviously changes when it is in a different tile...but the ID may not have changed. One can have it constantly update the ID so that all units in the same coordinate would be sequential...but the cost would significant increase loop cycles each time a unit moves (by you, by the AI, by retreating or other movements). Instead of attacking quickly most of the time with one unit and then the next, you would conceptually have a noticeable pause between each and every action. Would you prefer that instead?
|
stop bragging about your little worthless programming experience now. How difficult it is to fix the game does not matter to the consumer. The customer simply wants a better product. And, as a programmer and gamer, I think Libertarian's got the point here. This game is way too tedious toward the end, I will stop playing it if it is not fixed. Well, my friends already sopped anyways.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Steve Clark
|
 |
Colorado Springs, CO
Oct 1999
time: 22:16
|
|
Let me say something different here. The point is not whether this one fix should or shouldn't be done but it is in the manner how it should be requested. All that needed to be done was add it to the bug list thread, explaining exactly what the issue is in a clear, concise manner. To try to elevate this as more important than what others have said have rubbed some folks the wrong way. It is on Firaxis list (as with all of the other ones) to look into and to see if it is feasible, balancing that with other proposed fixes. Personally, I can see where this would be more convenient but many of us was able to play Nemo's SF and RF without stacked movement (and enjoy it!).
Last edited by Steve Clark on 19-12-2001 at 00:52
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Capt Dizle
|
|
If Firaxis considers these two issues "feature requests" then that exposes a basic problem.
These two problems, lack of stacked movement and non-sequential unit activation, are very serious problems. Given the high number of units that Civ3 is designed to produce, these problems are almost show stoppers.
I am sure that upwards of 85% of players have grown tired of this micromanagement tedium and either abandoned games to start a new one or quit playing Civ3 altogether.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
XPav
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by HawaiiFive-O
85% of all statistics are made up on the fly. |
Do you have a source on that?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Dida
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by jimmytrick
If Firaxis considers these two issues "feature requests" then that exposes a basic problem.
These two problems, lack of stacked movement and non-sequential unit activation, are very serious problems. Given the high number of units that Civ3 is designed to produce, these problems are almost show stoppers.
I am sure that upwards of 85% of players have grown tired of this micromanagement tedium and either abandoned games to start a new one or quit playing Civ3 altogether. |
this is very true. I'm totally sick of having to move my 200 tanks every turn. And in the middle of an intense battle, the screen would somehow jumps half way across the globe. And I have to make my way back to the battle scene.  considering you have to activate hundreds of units every turn, this is a very very serious problem.
The best feature in 1.16vf patch is that it turns off 'show enemy move', now, let me turn off 'auto cycle unit', I will activate them manually if Civ3 cannot do it right. This is a simple request, i don't see why it cannot be done.
As far as stacking is concern, it is not that bad to program in deed. CTP1 and 2 has shown that it can be done. And, stacking is already in Civ3, tha Army is an example of that.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HawaiiFive-O
|
 |
Novato, CA, USA
Dec 2000
time: 05:16
|
|
But on topic, I do agree with the content of Libertarian's request, if not the manner of delivery.
Yes, the unit activation thing is very annoying and fixing it would be most welcome.
Yes, stacked movement would be nice.
Do I, in my personal opinion, feel these are game-killers? Nope. Does it make me a bad person? Well, maybe in the minds of some posters on this board, but I sleep very well at night.
Does it make people who feel these ARE game-killers bad people? Of course not.
To each his own.
And I guarantee, at least 85% of the people that read this post will agree.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Libertarian
|
|
After a bit of introspection, I believe that I'm being too rough on the guys at Firaxis. In all probability, they're doing the best they can with the resources they have. I could provide a litany of reasons why I've snapped, but they're irrelevant.
Dan and Jeff, I apologize.
I'll try to play the game on a smaller map with fewer Civs. That might help ameliorate some of the tedium. Meanwhile, I do understand that you're people just like us, with feelings and the whole nine yards. I regret my mercilessness in my dealings with you.
I wish only that the cabalism weren't there, that we didn't have to fish and beg for information. I understand that some of what you do is proprietary, but some idea of what's in the works might go a long way to soothing those of us who don't like living in the fog of ignorance. Perhaps if it hadn't taken you so long to acknowledge...
Well, that's enough of that song. Onward.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
bahoo
|
|
I agree with Libertarians request and with a lot of other good constructive criticism of the game, although they are almost always followed up by flames.
But really, is anyone here satisfied with this response?
quote:
Originally posted by Jeffrey Morris FIRAXIS
We are aware of these feature requests, and when we have something concrete to say about them, we will.
Jeff |
Obviously their aware, they've acknowledged it before. A much better response would be:
"We're aware, and have no intentions of implementing it."
OR
"We're aware but have devoted our resources to more important bugs currently."
OR
"We'd like to implement it but isn't sure if it's feasible."
OR EVEN
"We don't make money from patches, so if it isn't a game breaking bug, don't hold your breath."
Something to give us an idea if they have any intentions of implementing it at all. I very much doubt that they don't at least know this.
It's just become natural, at least for me, to associate such vague responses with them having no intention of implementing it at all. If you've ever played Everquest you'd understand.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
eRAZOR
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by bahoo
I agree with Libertarians request and with a lot of other good constructive criticism of the game, although they are almost always followed up by flames.
But really, is anyone here satisfied with this response?
Obviously their aware, they've acknowledged it before. A much better response would be:
"We're aware, and have no intentions of implementing it."
OR
"We're aware but have devoted our resources to more important bugs currently."
OR
"We'd like to implement it but isn't sure if it's feasible."
OR EVEN
"We don't make money from patches, so if it isn't a game breaking bug, don't hold your breath."
Something to give us an idea if they have any intentions of implementing it at all. I very much doubt that they don't at least know this.
It's just become natural, at least for me, to associate such vague responses with them having no intention of implementing it at all. If you've ever played Everquest you'd understand. |
If they only had "something concrete" to say about anything (game related).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Unregistered
|
|
Micromanagement always has been the bane of the Civ franchise, this latest version hasn't really improved on this much, if any. It's usually the biggest reason that I end up putting them down & moving on.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yin26
|
 |
This space reserved for Darkstar.
Apr 1999
time: 14:16
|
|
quote:
When I have a concrete recommendation for my friends encouraging them to buy Civ3, I'll make it. |
I think this EXACTLY right. Listen, it's Firaxis' decision to either assure us in a responsible way that various issues are being addressed -- or not. And as the 'Head Gamer' in my circle of friends, my recommendations often carry some weight. So far, my recommendation regarding Civ3 has been:
"Perhaps by Gold Edition time it will be worth playing, but so far Firaxis has been very elusive as to how much they plan to support the boxed beta. No need to fund patches that might never come."
And that's also life in the big, bad gaming industry. Firaxis thinks the game should speak for itself. Sadly, it does.
Steve:
I saw in another thread that you referred to me as a 'friend and fellow father' who thinks our time here should amount to something while you think it is just entertainment.
I do want to say that I have always respected your desire to get under the hood and simply fix things yourself. If you recall, I think I coined the term 'Civ3 Construction Set' regarding you, actually. When the complete editor is finally available, I really look forward to seeing what you and others will do, as it seems obvious that the best stuff will come from the fans. And trust me: I know how hard it is to juggle all that as a busy family man.
As regards seeing our time here as entertainment, you might be surprised to know that I mostly agree. I don't break into cold sweats at night when Firaxis fails to give answers on things, etc. For me, I find the gaming industry fascinating in and of itself.
In so many ways, it's still a mom and pop operation only now mom and dad have a loan shark ready to break their legs if enough dollars don't roll in. The risks are bigger, the budgets are bigger, the egos are bigger ... and yet, the gameplay has often gotten smaller.
In that environment, I simply find it telling the path that a developer chooses to take in gaining fan loyalty. You can, as Firaxis pretty much does, position yourself as the 'hardworking programmers without much time or power to tell you what you want to know.' That's one way. Or you can, as with Alan at Quicksilver, answer EVERY e-mail sent to you. That's another way.
I suppose when an awesome game is released, it doesn't much matter either way. But there are almost always bound to be issues, and keeping them mole-hills instead of mountains requires, I believe, one approach over the other.
I will continue to be highly interested in how well Civ3, a potential blockbuster, sells over the next 4 months compared to Master of Orion 3, the highly developer-supported underdog. Now I know better than to think MOO3 will be without troubles, so I can't wait to see how they will handle the pressure when things heat up. It might be they will simply implode ... or they can turn decidedly negative issues into PR victories.
I can't wait. I have front row seats. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Steve Clark
|
|
Colorado Springs, CO
Oct 1999
time: 22:16
|
|
yin: Nicely worded. You hit upon a word that hadn't been brought up much before: loyalty. For me, buying a game doesn't amount to diddly squat because it was of my own free will and entitles me to no loyalty, either from the company or to it. I tend to be a disloyal person to impersonal things like games, sports teams, brands, etc. (mainly from being a 42 year old, I guess). This runs against those that are very emotional towards a sports team or to a game. That is maybe why I take a 'don't care' attitude, I don't know. But in the end, we both view the gaming industry (which I had been following very closely for 11+ years) and their fans as a form of entertainment. Truthfully, I am surprised at some of the things I see, but we'll know more of the story as it unfolds in 2002, won't we? In the meantime, save me a seat, we'll watch this together.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001
time: 06:16
|
|
If I understand, Firaxis answers (roughly) "When we have something to say, we'll say it".
What is wrong with this attitude ? They don't know any information, should they invent one just to please you ? I think they understood the lessons of their past failures : they announcd a super-duper editor, with scenarios etc. and the editor didn't support scenarios (it is pretty good for modding rules). They announced the patch for "friday or saturnday", and it was out with a major compatibility issue. They announced too early Civ3 for the 30 October, and they held their promise.
They have given way too much info in the past about what would be done in the future, and most of these informations couldn't be verified in given time (hence a rushed game, a rushed patch). Now they say : "We have no information, we won't want to disappoint you", and some people are still complaining ? I don't understand...
Firaxis : please be be much less transparent as you have been before, especially about the date releases (of future patches, of the gold edition). That way, we couldn't be disappointed. And please don't answer questions for which you don't know the answer.
To the people who complained about the answer from Firaxis : why did you complain ? PLease explain it to me clearly ? I don't get the logic here (excepet that the answer was crude...)
|
|
| |
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-12-2001 23:49
|