 |
|  |
 |
|
yin26
|
 |
This space reserved for Darkstar.
Apr 1999 time: 14:12
|
|
Dear Firaxis,
At this point in Civ3's development, perhaps the single most important thing to be done is fine-tuning, tweaking, and polishing this baby. Assuming Civ3 is still one year out, I'm guessing you could have a solid 4 major in-house / beta patch cycles. That could make all the difference. A sikly-smooth, highly-polished Civ3 is the surest way to wipe any competition off the market.
If this means dropping some nifty enhancements to Civ3, so be it. I know I have argued against a Civ2.5, but a highly polished Civ2.5 (or 2.75 ) will be FAR BETTER than an unstable, akward Civ3. (Of course the brass ring is the highly polished Civ3, so no hate mail from people thinking I'm against that effort, please...).
Also, if an open beta is off the table, PLEASE ADD MARKOS AND DAN TO YOUR BETA TEAM! While I might not always agree with them, I trust them implicitly to speak for all of us here at Apolyton. 
Having said that, I have immense faith in Sid. He has earned it, afterall. But I just think it would be so sad and silly if some bugs, imbalances or interface problems poke holes in what should clearly be the best TBS game ever made.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Steve Clark
|
 |
Colorado Springs, CO
Oct 1999 time: 22:12
|
|
quote:

Originally posted by DaveV on 02-06-2001 04:40 PM
I respectfully disagree. Dan and Mark have a great website, but that doesn't make them the best beta testers. In fact, the time they spend on Apolyton would necessarily decrease their testing time. Firaxis would be smart to grab the best people from the scenario creation forums, the strategy forums, and the multiplayer forums. Each person could attack the game from his own perspective. To cite one individual, Xin Yu has found more bugs and tricks than anyone else I've encountered. I've been hanging around on the Civ 2 forums for a long time, and I could name a bunch of people who would give Civ 3 a good working over. And false modesty doesn't prevent me from volunteering my own name as one of those...
 |
Perfectly said, Dave, especially the part about "the best people from the scenario creation forums, the strategy forums, and the multiplayer forums". Those are three most important part of Civ3 (scenarios, AI and MP), everything else is just superflous.
Besides, there are too many SMAC and CtP freaks here that would sway Civ3 to their bad ideas. j/k 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
yin26
|
 |
This space reserved for Darkstar.
Apr 1999 time: 14:12
|
|
Korn,
First, many thanks for that very nice note of support. However, I understand perfectly that Firaxis might well have written me off for past events. I will still continue to help with bug-lists and that sort of thing, and most certainly if Firaxis asked me to get involved in a beta, I'd work my butt off every breathing moment helping out (well, I'd have to sleep, earn a paycheck, and tuck my 2-year old daughter to bed, but aside from that).
Like I said, though, I might have painted myself into a corner as the "thorn in the side" type they might not want to deal with on a beta. Too bad, but understandable.
For the record, I have been taking a much more productive approach to all these issues since SMAC v4.0. All I really want, as with the rest of us, is an awesome, VERY stable Civ3. This thread is dedicated to asking that as much is done as possible BEFORE release to make sure that happens.
Thanks again, Korn, but if I were a betting man, the odds of my being asked on for the beta are somewhere between "Don't make me laugh!" and "Has hell frozen over?" 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Ralf
|
 |
Sweden
Mar 2000 time: 06:12
|
|
YIN26, first quote:
"At this point in Civ3's development, perhaps the single most important thing to be done is fine-tuning, tweaking, and polishing this baby. Assuming Civ3 is still one year out, I'm guessing you could have a solid 4 major in-house / beta patch cycles. That could make all the difference. A sikly-smooth, highly-polished Civ3 is the surest way to wipe any competition off the market."
YIN26, second quote:
"Yes, I agree that if the beta is to be closed, then Markos and Dan (and perhaps a few others?) would do an excellent job of doing things "by the book" while doing their absolute best to represent their years of experience listening to the Civ crowd."
I really can sympathize with your first quote, Yin26! A "silkly-smooth, highly-polished Civ-3" anyone? 
What I dont understand however is the supposed connection with the second quote. 
What you are suggesting is basically a standard of-the-shelf closed beta-testing of a commercial game. Something that every game-developer in the industry already does, and something that Firaxis also did with the Alpha Centauri game. The only difference seems to be that you want them to "add Markos and Dan to your beta team".
Now, I have absolutely nothing against that they add some Apolyton-members to their beta-testing team (although I am sure that they can find more Apolyton-candidates to choose from, then just Markos & Dan). What I dont understand however, is how adding 3-5 Apolyton beta-testers, would be the equivalent of "a solid 4 major in-house / beta patch cycles. That could make all the difference."
Isnt it reasonable to think that the SMAC beta-testers where just as 100% dedicated? Despite this, Firaxis had to release no less then four game-patches, until fans (and perhaps also Firaxis) was reasonably satisfied.
These patch-requests, by the way, came from thousends of fans - many of them with strikingly different playing-styles, played on hugely varied & different hardware/software-combinations. And the bugs themselves originated from hundreds and hundreds of different/unique game-situations.
How, can above possibly be nullified just by adding 3-5 apolyton-members to the beta-testing team? The truth is that it simply cannot. Firaxis have really only two beta-testing options to choose from. Either...
1: Traditional closed beta-testing = A reasonably playable game, that can be much smother & more stable with the help of some additional game-patches.
2: Open/semi-open beta-testing = A more smother/stable game already from the first day of the game-release.
Ok then - maybe a fully open beta-testing of Civ-3 is unrealistic because of the reasons mentioned in previous posts. But, that also means that any ideas of releasing a game with the complexity of Civ-3, without the need of any additional game-pathes - is also unrealistic.
[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited February 07, 2001).]
|
|
|  |
 |
|
yin26
|
 |
This space reserved for Darkstar.
Apr 1999 time: 14:12
|
|
Ralf,
First, an Alpha test might even be a better term for what I'm thinking, but I'm assuming Civ3 is far enough down the line to call it a Beta test...even if it won't be out for a year.
Of course I want a MUCH larger effort paid to these issues, including broadly expanding the base of testers. It's not like I'm saying, "Adding Markos and Dan to your team will fix everything." I've inquired about an open beta on more than one occasion, but it looks like it won't happen.
So I'm saying, 1) Please start the testing NOW, even if that means cutting short some new ideas. Then invest the saved time and money in tweaking and polishing. Oh, I'm sure some testing automatically occurs as the game is programmed, but that's not we're talking about. Some of SMAC's nastiest bugs/issues weren't apparent on the surface.
And from what I know about SMAC, not much of their feedback (on bigger issues anyway) could be addressed with the time and staff that was available. I know this from actually speaking with them. They mentioned the color, several bugs, etc., and I have respect for the work they did in pointing out virtually ALL of the issues that caused patches to have to be released. I'm sure that same group would do an outstanding job on Civ3, but we might have the same result. This concerns me.
Keep in mind, too, that Jeff Morris was a "one man QA department" and you've got the picture. Assuming he still is, what's going to happen? He's only human, and what feedback he DOES get from testers might have to be very selectively considered.
This is true of ANY beta test, I realize...you can't redesign the game, of course, but the SMAC patch process took several months after release to complete. So at least leave that much more time in the development process to address those kinds of issues BEFORE release this time around.
And 2) I don't think an open beta will happen. It's not Firaxis tradition. Last I heard, the number of testers will double from what was on SMAC. Of course this is good, but I'd just REALLY like to have Dan and Markos involved if it's going to be a closed beta. I trust them to do a great job.
But what will they bring to the task that the other beta testers won't? Perhaps nothing...perhaps a great deal. I will say, though, that they have a tremendous awareness of public opinion and have seen first-hand patch issues and so forth. And I also think Firaxis will trust them for that...
Bottom Line: LET'S NOT MAKE CIV3 ANOTHER "PATCH A PATCH" MELODRAMA! If that requires a public or much expanded closed-beta, great. If that means cutting out some features to focus on this stuff, great.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12. Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|