 |
| |
|
|
MarkG
|
|
Grand Lord of Apolyton, Owner of all this land as far as the eye can see
|
|
Just got the following letter from Firaxis to the Civ Community
quote:
Hi Everyone.
As you all know, Civilization III: Play The World was released a couple of weeks ago and we quickly became aware, thanks to feedback from many of you, that there are connectivity and lag issues with the internet multiplayer component. I want to update you on how we’re addressing these issues and let you know that we are working diligently to remedy the situation, and that we will see it through. A patch for Play the World is now being tested and we will announce its availability very soon.
The patch we are testing addresses issues related to internet play including, fixes to the matchmaking process via GameSpy Arcade, improvements to overall game speed, fixes for lag issues and “player-drop” crashes, and the addition of Direct IP support.
We appreciate all the positive feedback we’ve received concerning PTW’s single-player features. We’ve also heard from many people who are having great multiplayer experiences using their LANs. We are doing everything we can to ensure that the Play The World internet experience is every bit as fun and reliable.
We certainly regret that PTW’s debut was less than what people have come to expect from Firaxis Games. I want you all to know that Firaxis is thoroughly committed to making great games and to supporting Civilization III: PTW and fixing the outstanding issues as soon as we can. We appreciate your helpful feedback and continued patience.
Best,
Jeff Briggs
President and CEO
FIRAXIS Games |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
HappySunShine
|
|
The Sunshine State, where else?
Jul 2002
time: 00:23
|
|
If it goes like the others the release of the patch will be followed by the announcement of another patch in the works.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MariOne
|
 |
Erewhon in Neverland
May 1999
time: 06:23
|
|
Well, gotta admit that this is a topsiding reversal in Firaxis PR habits...
they must have learned a lot since their hulk-behavior back at SMAC times, when their favorite punchlines were:
"you should THANK us for putting bugs in the game, because they cement your feeling of belonging to an online community"
" ..... a 'BUG' ?????? Oh, but that's not a 'bug', not at all! .....It's a feature!!!!"
Not mentioning their early CivIII patching policy, which can be summarised in:
"Damn, some nerd has found a trick our best minds could not think of, to ridiculise the AI we claimed unbeatable on Deity... Let's do something... Let's.... patch that trick out of the game!!!"
I am positively impressed that they finall appear to have learned what "customer" and "PR" means.
I wish them to not squander their chances again.
This won't anyway make me take down CivIII from the shelf, where it's rightfully resting since long months, nor look with expectation to the next FurXs © release...
PS: to the comment regarding "patience"... would you please realise that the reasons of Firaxis existence are CUSTOMERS and MONEY they get FROM THEM?????? They're on the market, they're on SALE. They must do EVERYTHING they think convenient to increase their sales, or rather, their margin of profit.
When one one of these decisions comes down to cutting short the support on their customers, they should try to APPEASE the let down customers, not to AGGRAVATE them with the comments quoted above....
I am more than glad to give them all the chances they need, but if you think that "patience" is at stake, that would mean teay chose the wrong activity in life.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MariOne
|
|
Erewhon in Neverland
May 1999
time: 06:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by notyoueither
So I guess you're just here to troll then, eh? |
I'm here because MarkG put a link to this thread as a topped announcement in every Apolyton forum.
I followed the link to the thread, I didn't even bothered to notice in which forum it was.
If you call it a troll, you're welcome to it.
To me, it was a calm, objective and balanced contribution to a discussion, brigning a documented PoV which praised the new FurXs attitude, comparing it with their atittude in the past.
Your own dismissive words only speak against YOUR wit, not mine....
To Frustrated Poet:
quote:
If you ... don't like it then return it to the shop for a refund. That is your right as a consumer
|
I'm glad for you that you have such advanced legislation in your country.
Here in Italy we have no such rights.
We can return a product to the shop if it's defective in its fabrication. Like, say, if the CD is scratched, and even there, once I open the envelope, the shop could object there's no proof I didn't scratch it myself...
The reseller is not liable for any inadequacy in the design of the object, that's my task as a choosing customer. In such case I should go directly to the publisher, and I didn't even imagine that IG would heed me had I returned them CivIII because (as like MANY other posters on Apolyton) I thought it was a crappy game.
That said, of course any company is free to behave like a$$holes with their customers. And equally of course the customers have the right to be vocal when they're treated like that.
So FurXs owes us nothing, IF THEY DON'T CARE TO KEEP A SATISFACTED CUSTOMER BASE.
If they instead care for it, it's not a matter of patience.
When the customer is always right, there must be NO limit to your patience, it must be never an issue about patience. It's just a matter that a company has to draw a line and decide to which extent is CONVENIENT to go that way, and how big a % of customers is commercially convenient to leave unsatisfacted.
Nobody is forcing us to play CivIII, but it should be *FurXs* interest that the most possible of us do it! And if we're not satisifed by their follow-up once they got our money and we can't get it back, that would *of course* reflect on the sales of their *next* product.
So, if they were "patient" as you said, rest assured that they did it because all considered it was still within THEIR own convenience, not for our sake or out of their kindness, and there's little to thank them about.
That's just to put things straight. Of course I know it's all just about respectable PoVs, but you'll agree that, not surprisingly, my own PoV makes more sense to me than someone else's, exactly because it's *my* PoV.
If you reread my post anyway, you'll see that I'm GLAD of the new FurXs PR attitude, nevetherless this doesn't make CivIII a better game in my eyes.
Status, I ENJOY playing.
Only, I enjoy playing other games, and not CivIII.
And one of the games I enjoy playing most since 4 years is SMAC, *despite* the innumerable bugs it was riddend with, and *despite* the bad attitude that FurXs had in the past years.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Adm.Naismith
|
 |
Milano - Italy
Oct 1999
time: 06:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tiberius
MariOne, the fact that you don't enjoy Civ3 is not Firaxis' fault. The game was patched, it has no bugs, it is playable, replayable, enjoyable and I like it very much. The fact that you don't like is a matter of taste entirely, exactly in the same way as I don't like SMAC. Don't blame them for this. |
Tiberius IMHO MariOne is not questioning about Civ III enjoynment, if not "en passant".
MariOne is writing a very clear post that show how different (not better) are Italian and some others countries (USA, but not alone) markets and customers "culture".
Fact is: Firaxis show now a better (if a bit late) understanding of customers satisfaction, with a public note about PTW defective features. Well done 
Fact is: in some countries, companies need to show and act according to an "ethical paper" that is a bit more deep than: "I build anything I want, advertise its features and sell it "AS IS", without implicit or explicit quality level; you are the customer, buy it or leave it". I find enlighting, still surprising, to discover a group of customers that think this is a good business model FOR THEM! (I see why it is a very convenient business model for some companies).
But that is off topic, and mine IS NOT a rant against Firaxis. OTOH, is not a "thank", neither.
They are doing their job now, and when I properly do my job is only my duty, not my merit. Or so say my Boss at every salary review 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MariOne
|
|
Erewhon in Neverland
May 1999
time: 06:23
|
|
Tiberius, as you quote me, please allow me to quote myself too, reporting something that you must have overlooked
quote:
I am positively impressed that they finally appear to have learned what "customer" and "PR" means. |
This is the main point of my post.
I just avoided to make a prone, bleeting, shallow praise, so I dressed my praise with some perspective, with some history, with some context.
So, what I quote here is the answer to your comments, and Admiral was spot on.
If you need something more, as you don't seem contented of the above:
It's true that "No game company can please everyone."
But do you infer that if a company X makes a game that pleases player A and displeases player B, then player B has NO RIGHT to complain, because player A likes the game instead????
You have a very weird way to argument....
Good for you if you enjoy CivIII. This does NOT take away from me the right to blame Firaxis if they made a game that DOES pleas YOU and DOES NOT please ME. I can speak for *myself*.
Besides, you don't share my PoV and my taste, but there are MANY posters HERE on Apolyton that instead DO, so mine is not a question of mere personal taste, it's a wide current of thought regarding gaming.
There is a wide customer base like you that liked CivIII.
But there is also a wide portion of gamers that didn't.
And if you want to reduce it to a matter of taste, I'll tell you that those who discarded CivIII did not it just whimsically, but on the ground of a thought comparison with other games in the same genre, from the same authors and/or from the same company.
If you don't want to compare it with the undeniable richness of SMAC gamplay, compare it with CivII with whichj it shares the name.
CivIII gameplay was tailored on one thing: the AI playing level.
Despite adding many new elements into the game, the real gamemplay options have been reduced, to allow the AI being cometitive.
COMPARED to SMAC and also to CivII, CivIII is a SHALLOW game.
These comments are really very old news, this judgement has been posted in this same site by dozens of other poster, I'm merely reporting it here as the subject has been raised.
So, if you want to bring it down to a matter of taste, I agree:
only because I like deep games, I'll never dare to despise, condemn, belittle or mock those who have a personal taste for shallow games, I fully respect their taste and choice. But I retain my right to blame a company to have made a sequel shallower than its predecessors.
Even if SMAC had never come out, being forced to choose between playing CivIII or CivII, I'd go on playing CivII all my life.
ANYWAY.
My initial POST was NOT an issue between SMAC and the Civs.
MarkG LED me to read this thread.
I saw many praises.
I joined in the praises, but not rolling over, offering instead a wider PoV to the readers.
SMAC had a great design, a pitiful implemetation, and a bad PR followup.
Now I appraise the good PR and decent followup.
Incidentally, this is applied to a game with an inferior design, in my humble and dozens other Apolytoner's opinion...
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23.
Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
20-11-2002 04:33
ACK!
). Thank god they have more patience.
|