posted 07-09-99 11:49 AM ET     

Have any of you looked at http://www.firaxis.com/team.htm ? Firaxis has 21 people. It is a _small_ company. Contrary with some idiotic opinions, it is no MicroProse- and I don't believe they ever want to be so.

I hear complaints about the inadequacy of the enhancements/patches for SMAC.
5 of the people on Firaxis' team are listed as Programmers- including BR and SM. I'm sure that some of the other fellows have programming experience, but the truth is that there are only 5 'full time' programmers. Firaxis is working on Antietam, which is probably taking up most of SM's time- this leaves 4. BR is gearing up for Civ3- this leaves 3. Of course, SMACX is also in the works. Presumably, some or all of the remaining _3_ people are busy on these projects.
So the patch/enhancement, which _did_ address most of the major issues with v3, was the work of few people: and good work it was, too.

The much griped about lack of feedback has one root cause: EA does the translations. After it leaves Firaxis' hands, they're just waiting for feedback from EA, which is probably nominal. The best they _might_ be able to do is say when the various translations checked in.

Further, if you have problems with or suggestions for SMAC, there are now 2 semi-official things you can do that are actually a _contribution_: You can help with the bug tracking list or you can help with the wish list- either at firaxis.com or at apolyton.net, whichever you prefer.

If you just want to rant about how lame FIRAXIS/SMAC/your lunch was, why don't you spend your time doing something constructive- either helping to make SMAC or the future Civ3 a better game, or doing something creative of _your_own_, like a web page, or writing, or coding, or something that contributes to this 3rd rock from the sun instead of just being a waste of carbon.

There can be no denying, as others have pointed out more vociferously than I, that Firaxis needs to make the Internet more central in their strategy, of their own accord- pre, during, and post-production. We are, as fanatic fans, helping to move them in that direction.

Help us convince Firaxis that they _want_ to do this, not that it's a terrible mistake.

posted 07-09-99 11:55 AM ET         

(SMACX, Antietam, Civ3, and the sequel? Now _that's_ a full plate)

posted 07-09-99 12:28 PM ET            

However, SM is *not* working on a SMAC sequel. He is working on the yet-unnamed third game in the Sweep of Time series. He has been spending the last two years on this project. I suspect that it will use a completely different game engine, because he has spent so much time on it.

posted 07-09-99 12:51 PM ET            

The size of the company is unimportant the problem is in quality control. Most of the bugs should have never been in the finished product.

posted 07-09-99 01:07 PM ET            

Yes, it would be a nicer place if no one here felt the need to say in more words "I am seriously unhappy with how you have done this..."

No matter the size or dedication of the Firaxian team they still made mistakes, they still have a flawed product (better than most of the other flawed products out there no doubt.)
The simple truth is that now, over 5 months after the release of the game their are still features contrary to the design ideas or deficiencies in the game that diminsh game play. Should they be responsible for correcting every single one, realistically no. But there are still some that effect game enjoyment, like the feature that when the first human player is killed in PBEM games then the game is over.

My expectation of a game design company is that they would know the functionality of the game inside and out, and that basic things like this would have been found by the designers/developers long before it reaches us.

I expect some bugs when a game is released, that is reality. I do still claim the right to question-complain-curse when a game has what I feel is too many bugs, or ones that seriously effect my enjoyment.

>>Y'know, I'm bloody sick of people dissing Firaxis and acting like it's their Right to do so.<<

I understand being sick of listening to complaints, it is tiring. You must admit though it is my "right" to do so.

posted 07-09-99 01:32 PM ET            

First off, you are just OUT OF LINE. Completely. Every USoA citizen has the constitutional RIGHT to express their opinions, whether for the Good or Ill of Firaxis and or SMAC, here and everywhere else within US sovereignity.

Second, you are wrong. Have you LOOKED at the Team list for their projects? There is a lot more listed for Fir than a meager 10 to 20 people people per product. And I am NOT talking translation teams.

Third, Sid is working Sid3/SMEG. Firaxis just about doubled its production staff from the buzz they have told US so that BR can do Civ3, while Sid does Sid3. Some of their Original Staff is suppose to be working SMACX, but if its been outsourced, I wouldn't be surprised. The Battle of Anitiem is a sequeal based on the Gettysburg! engine, and I expect they don't think it will take much time, in comparison to Civ3 or Sid3.

Fourth, I do contribute to the Civ3 Wish List... as well as the Improve SMAC list, the SMACX list, and the SMAC bug list. I am considering trading my complaint rights for beta testing, if FirX would accept me. They might, as I have a lot of experience on both side of the development team.

Fifth, take your own advice and stop complaining, or we will be forced to taunt you again.

posted 07-09-99 03:38 PM ET            

we see a fair-to-good product that could have been GREAT.

we know that FurXs was miserly on resources for v4.0 and as a result they produced a disappointment that is adequate at best, what does this bode for SMACX?

we thought that by posting bugs here at alpha.owo.com that they would get some attention and might possibly be fixed. We were wrong

there are AT LEAST 100 unfixed bugs in SMAC

at least a dozen of those bugs are serious enough to warrant fixing and we are not sure if they will be

one of those bugs (the premature death of PBEM games) seems to have been introduced in v4.0 and is a SHOW STOPPER (at least in the small minds of those people who think that MP SMAC ought to work, I know, I know ... we are scummy newbies)

the QA Director for FurXs carps about how GREAT SMAC is and judging from the SALES figures (i.e., the $$$money$$$) he is correct, judging from the QUALITY of the (un)finished product ... well ... you decide

we now know that if we have any hope to see any more fixes, we are going to have to do more of FurXs QA's job for it. That is, make a list of bugs, triage the list, provide support files, etc.

Finally, FurXs consistently "disses" us by a) ignoring most of our offers to help, b) disregarding almost all of the input and support that people have offered ***FREE OF CHARGE*** and c) harrassing one of the longtime members of this forum

If these are not sufficient reasons to "diss" FurXs, then, tell me, what would be sufficient reasons???

Sure, there are some who chose not to discuss this stuff in a civil manner. But so what! Grow up.

One more thing, people are starting to wise up: first SMAC v1.0, then CtP and now this "rump" patch 4.0. How many more straws TBS camels tolerate. TBSers are becoming more skeptical. It's too bad that FurXs JUST DOESN'T GET IT.

If they are outsourcing SMACX, this is one more reason to have turn a jaundiced eye towards its quality AND SUBSTANCE. I can tell you right now that SMACX will fill store shelves until some GOOD reports show up on the net (here's hoping they do, but I am not holding my breath)

posted 07-09-99 04:00 PM ET            

It would be my right to dis them even without having this knowledge base, of course.

And I don't care if they "only" have 21 people. I've seen single-author freeware be supported with a much better attitude and quicker response time.

I'm more disappointed in the attitude than I am in the number of bugfixes.

Furthermore, many of the most vocal critics /have/ reported bugs, in some cases quite thoroughly explained and documented, so your little suggestion as to something 'productive' to do makes you look even stupider than you did when you complained about people thinking they have the right to complain about something they have a problem with. Of course they have the right to complain. They could complain about anythign they wanted.

I understand that Firaxis needs to make money and they don't, strictly speaking, make money off of bugfixes. Not directly. But they do lose money off bad attitude and a /lack/ of bugfixes... since there are some people who will not buy another Firaxis game. It's a tricky balancing act. Firaxis can't please everyone.

But I'm of the firm opinion they could be pleasing a larger percentage. Usually if there are as many complaints -- mild to strong -- as there have been about the response time of Firaxis, there's a /good/ reason for it. From observation, I believe there is.

Firaxis: your attitude disappoints me. You are losing in goodwill what you are saving in salaries by putting bugfix so low on your list. I am unlikely to buy another Firaxis game until I see an improvement in the responses given to people when they have a complaint.

Note that throughout all this I have not said SMAC sucks. It doesn't. It /is/ a rather impressive game, bugs and all. My complaint isn't about the product. My complaint is solely the attitude.

Disappointed,

posted 07-11-99 08:44 PM ET         

Eris:
I agree- Firaxis needs to make the net, and the attendant feedback, more central to their approach. The fact that they don't do this makes us feel marginalized, and ignores a valuable resource.

The productive comment only applied to those that post messages that just rip with no usefull content. I have no problem with those that complain- with actual data to back up their assertion.

I'll say it a thousand times: No-one has any *right* to say whatever they want in these forums. There was, if I recall correctly, something everyone agreed to when they joined this forum- about not cursing, trying to sell stuff, etc. This is a forum run by a private company. When you speak here it is as if you were speaking in Firaxis' office- Writing here is a benefit, not a right.
The fact that Firaxis lets people say almost anything is either a testament to their intestinal fortitude or their ability to selectively ignore

tfs99:
I find it amusing that I should grow up because I find it annoying that people cannot be civil. I was always under the impression that civility was one of the indicators of maturity.
I agree with the rest of your points.

Darkstar:
By your own definition, I cannot be out of line. Second, see above. You do _not_ have the *right* to say whatever you want- not here, not in public spaces. As far as the public spaces goes, have you never heard the "Yelling 'FIRE!' in a public theatre" example of the limits to free speech? As to the other, I addressed it above.

I'm glad you contribute, Darkstar. By contributing, you're obviously not the type of person I'm talking about.
I don't see why you feel it necessary to slap me with a wet fish. I'm just encouraging people to keep criticism constructive, not insulting. Do you need examples?

Oh, yah, I knew SM was working on the third one- that's what I meant by sequel- Not SMAC II, but sequel like Star Wars II...

Goobmeister: Constructive criticism, as I said in my first post, is fine. For example, I would really like to make maps, but I'm bloody sick of getting BSOD's that take down my whole system after spending half an hour on a map. Not to mention other problems I have with the map etitor when it's not crashing.

posted 07-11-99 08:54 PM ET            

Personally, I agree, and stand by my comments, posted in numerous threads on these forums, where I've made many of the same points that you have. But then, I am...

posted 07-11-99 11:26 PM ET            

When you say we can't say or type what we want here... THAT is out of line. And in general I thought your general ranting about other people to be out of line. But we all do that around here, or so it seems.

Second, I'm in 'Bama. And I have the right to yell "Fire!" here in a crowded theatre. Shocking but true. We get real schiziod about going along with the Federal line or striking it down. Must be something in the red clay. So, I can indeed say anything I want, including violating state and national secrets. Some things carry a legal penalty, some are not necessarily smart, but my speech is protected, as is yours. As the law keeps flip-flopping on whether this form of communication is truly SPEECH or PRINT, its got the protections of both. This forum can only limit our online speech in the interest of protecting: National Security, Children (National Resource and general Political excuse for all), and the general peace. Protecting their reputaion is in no way a legal right, especially if it eclipses the rights of the public to express their opinions. If they allow any and or all online, its a public place, or so the legal defination is currently. That is its purpose and that is our Right. "Cyber-law" is an evolving thing, and perhaps that will change. Perhaps it won't. Only time will tell...

Later!

posted 07-12-99 05:36 AM ET            

I'm kind of sympathetic to the "cut-the-whinging" aspect. However, the title of your post does Firaxis a disservice -

Firaxis is a *BRILLIANT* games company.

Why?

Because it's taken us and we're still coming back for more.

How?

They release a product that has more bugs than an old carpet. They charge us serious amounts of dosh for it.

Hom many returns did they get? Not many, I'll wager. Why? Because they keep us hanging on a string with serial patching.

Even better, we keep giving them lists of bugs for them not to fix in the next patch. With all of us working for them, they should be able to keep the headcount done.

Now, we eagerly await the sequel

SMACX - The Ultimate Patch

Making us pay again for the product that we shouldn't have had to have helped to fix to this extent in the first place

So...

Firaxis is a *BRILLIANT* games company. Great business plan or incompetence - you vote

Resource Consumer
- do I get banned now? -

posted 07-12-99 09:15 AM ET            

Participants in this forum are licensees. A license is a private contract. The terms of the contract were spelled out in the registration process. Firaxis right to enforce the terms of that license is not limited by the first amendment because Firaxis is a private entity, not a governmental entity. Violate the contract and Firaxis has the right to invoke the penalties spelled out in the contract. Simple as that.

Your guarantee of free speech in the real world does not guarantee you that if you write a letter to the editor of the local newspaper, it will be printed. Similarly, your guarantee of free speech on the internet does not guarantee that if you post in this forum, Firaxis will not delete it. Your guarantee of speech in both the real world and the 'net world is the same: you have the right to voice and publish your opinions: (i) in truly public forums (but not forums privately owned by others); and (ii) in any forum that you, yourself, create (i.e. your own newspaper or pamphlets, or your own website). The first amendment has never given anyone at any time the right to hijack someone elses privately funded publication for their own purposes.

posted 07-12-99 09:25 AM ET            

Curses foiled again...

posted 07-12-99 09:47 AM ET            

You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this BB to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law. You agree not to post any copyrighted material unless the copyright is owned by you or by this BB.

Although this BB does not and cannot review the messages posted and is not responsible for the content of any of these messages, we at this BB reserve the right to delete any message for any or no reason whatsoever.

* * * * * * * * * *

Defame:
to harm the reputation of by libel or slander.

Libel:
a: a written or oral defamatory statement or representation that conveys an unjustly unfavorable impression.
b: a statement or representation published without just cause and tending to expose another to public contempt.

Slander:
the utterance of false charges or misrepresentations which defame and damage another's reputation.

Now that we have our definitions straight.

I still have the "right" to criticize as I like. Firaxis has the "right" to delete my postings and block my account.

Most of us keep some form of objectivity and reason buried somewhere in our posts, most of the time.

Firaxis is very tolerant of what is said.

I think mainly because most of what is said is ultimately positive. We are critical of SMAC's flaws, but 96% of the posters here are fans of SMAC.

There is no compelling reason for EA or Firaxis to come in and with a heavy hand sweep aside all those who have "dissed" the game and the company.

It does speak well of them that we are "allowed" to dis and complain.

Goob

posted 07-12-99 11:12 AM ET         

Enjoy the game... I'm off to comment on some of the problems I found in v4...

posted 07-12-99 12:03 PM ET            

The law is confused as where our constitutional rights end, and corporate entities begin, in the digital world. Its confused over whether the equipment is owned by the persons or businesses that bought it, or the general public just because its hooked to a now general public resource and makes use of it. Until such basic issues are resolved, there will be no way to properly settle corporate rights versus poster rights.

The law had been clear at one time in the pasts about such things. Hopefully, it will be equally clear so that a dim-wit like myself can follow it all again.

posted 07-12-99 01:12 PM ET            

I am aware that CA has passed it's own law declaring certain internet freedoms, but this law only applies to internet entities owned and operated by the State of CA, i.e. its government and university system servers. This doesn't even establish precedent for private serves in CA, much less the nation at large. As to case law in CA (and elsewhere), such that exists generally supports the notion that private entities can restrict speech on the 'net--even when those "private" entities are funded in part by the government. It is sufficient in those cases that the use is private, even if the server is government owned/funded or the person running the server is a government employee. As long as the restrictions to not actually represent government action, courts have generally been saying it's OK. If you have specific case citations to the contrary, I'd be very interested in seeing them.

I will grant you that the theory of a "quasi"-public place has been around for a while, e.g. the airport and the mall as privately owned, but quasi-public, so some degree of first amendment protection applies. This theory, however has only been sporadically applied and affords no great degree of protection to a speaker who is interfering with the function of the quasi-public place. Example: the government must have a "compelling interest" in adopting time/place/manner (T/P/M) restrictions on speech and those restrictions must be "narrowly tailored" to the interest. Private persons who must afford some free speech protection because there's is a quasi-public place must only meet a test that restrictions must be "reasonable" and "reasonably-related" to the interest of the owner. This is a much lower standard. If any standard applies at all to Firaxis (and I don't think any does), it would be this much lower standard.

Banning someone on account of obscenity, however, will meet either standard. There is a famous US Supreme Court case involving a Vietnam War protestor who wore a jacket inside the courthouse emblazoned with the legend "F*** the Draft" (excepting that his jacket did not use asterisks). His arrest and conviction for disorderly conduct was upheld because disallowing the display of obscene language in a public building was a T/P/M restriction on speech which met the strict test for government action. Notably, the defense that the speech was protected because of its content was rejected. A defense that he had been selectively prosecuted based on the content of his message was also rejected. Essentially, his use of obscenity trumped his content and any "right" that might have attached to it.

Consequently, even if one were to accept the (IMHO, extremely unlikely) premise that the full range of free speech protections applied to the actor recently "banned" (a misnomer, since he was merely subjected to the revocation of a single "handle"), it *still* does not represent a miscarriage of justice because enforcing a ban on obscene language is something that even meets the strict test for TPM regulations *and* there is no defense based on the context in which the obscenity was used or the potential motives of the enforcing entity.

posted 07-12-99 03:31 PM ET            

It is a sad fact of today's gaming market that games require patches, some of them huge (19mb for SiN). Has any game ever been regarded as The Ultimate Game� by all and sundry? If that was the case, why would companies make more games, if everyone could just by THE ONE?

posted 07-12-99 05:32 PM ET            

Thanks. Some of the specifics that I have been hijacked to were not as well spelled out to a simple person like myself as your post. I have only been watching with minor interest in several of the "free speech" watchdog cases running about, but had found the posted results odd. That makes much more sense to me. Thank you, and I stand corrected. May I sit down now, sir?

A Simple Aside: It wasn't the lose of a single handle. It's the loss of all handles suspected to be of Trippin Daily by whoever is enforcing the ban. If you signed your post using his tag line, you'd be gone. At least in the "hot time". Trip hasn't returned here or the Firaxis boards as far as I know, so the banning action was successful.

JohnIII... I haven't tried any of those games. I was busy with other things when they first appeared, and heard through the grapevine about all sorts of nasty things from friends and associates. Word of Mouth consumerism in action. The last buggy games I bought was SMAC and CtP. And technically, SMAC was a birthday gift to me. I have bought several games and enjoyed them since SMAC and CtP were put on the shelves. Railroad Tycoon 2:The Second Century (Expansion - One simple small patch), Rollercoaster Tycoon (1 Simple utility for oddity regarding time (daylight/standard) changes) are the last two that easily spring to mind. While neither game was necessarily as complex as SMAC or CtP, they were well made and tested and I thought of very high quality. And as a consumer, that is what matters to me.

posted 07-13-99 07:43 PM ET            

talking about them is more fun than the game on occasions.