posted 09-15-99 04:27 AM ET            

There are also people that thought it was too Civ2 like.

There are also people that thought it was too UNLIKE Civ2.

Then there are those that wanted REVOLUTIONARY. They aren't sure WHAT that would be, but that is what they wanted.

Let's not forget the people that thought it would be this earth shattering end all be all TBS game (from all the hype they had read, and their OWN expectations), and instead got SMAC (no, I am NOT dissing it here, just saying that they got something LESS than expected).

And then, there are those that think if it had been implemented in a different fashion, something more suited to their play-style or enjoyment, it would be better.

And then, there is a general Firaxis public incidents that seem to have grated on many people, and SMAC is suffering due to being a child of Firaxis.

I don't hate SMAC. I think it *is* equal to Civ2, in my arrogant opinon. Some things are better, some things are worse. I do have a dislike of certain of the company's sentiments and statements. And I do have a complaint with the IMPLEMENTATION (especially it's quality). That's derived from my professional experiences and what comes along with it. Both are silly, and my personal problems.

But, as someone in my family or one of my friends is bound to give me Civ3 as a gift, I am going to do whatever I can, however little or great, to express to Firaxis that QUALITY is a necessary IMPLEMENTATION evil. It's no fun (well, except for the play-testing). But it truly is part of the price paid to make a quality product worthy of the Legends crafting it.

posted 09-15-99 01:20 PM ET            

I missed gaming during the Civ & Civ 2 period. I was busy starting a family

The last TBS game I played prior to SMAC was EMPIRE. On an Amiga.

Needless to say, SMAC is the most exciting game I have played in many a year. I loved Pirates and so am a fan of Sid Meier.

Therefore, as a resurrected gamer, I hereby decree that SMAC is the BEST game I own and the most fulfilling TBS game that I have ever played.

*bows*

posted 09-15-99 04:01 PM ET            

I don't think that dislike of SMAC has ever been much of an issue. Even though you and I are diametrically opposed in most of this debate, I think that neither side has had much patience for the poster who came in with something like "SMAC stinks and I'm out of here". Rather, I think the issue and thread topic might instead be focused on why do so many people who like the game have so many reservations about it and Firaxis?

I think Darkstar touches on this very well and I would only add that if you are going to go out and hype a game, the designers reputations and all of the great things that you are doing; well, you better have big feet to fill those shoes. I would hope that by now that even both you and I could agree that what was promised was not delivered and maybe they'll get it right on Alien Crossfire. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Now more to the point on historical vs scifi.

Let me submit three possible scenarios for the choice of venue. As you can see, none have anything to do with fan response to this choice.

First, BR did SMAC because he likes scifi stuff(he writes extensively on this) and this provided him the opportunity to do something he really likes.

Second, the big legal hoopla over the whole civ thing had a bunch of limitations placed on each signatory in order to get past all of the legal roadblocks. Perhaps Firaxis couldn't do a Civ game and not violate this agreement? This would also let them use their civ code and this would let them get to the market quicker than starting from scratch. BTW, I think this is an area that really warrants further thought and I say this because of the coding and proprietary graphics issues.

3) The Firaxis people were really smart and they decided that SMAC might break new ground and really open up the field. In short, that it would actually be a benefit not to be so directly compared to the existing civ chassis. Again, there's a lot going for this along two lines. First, CTP has been scorched for unit disparities that result in pikemen beating up on tanks. Clearly, this will always be a result in any game that is a historical simulator. Second, Firaxis have publicly said that they are looking at doing 3 games that cover time immortal. What better way to do this than with a near term scifi game, a civ III game that comes out after all the lawsuits are settled and a third game that goes in on either end as a total future space game or an ancients game.

Please note. Each of these items is not mutually exclusive and perhaps Firaxis, et al... are actually so brilliant as to do all three!