What was the UT3 fiasco you speak of?  I never really paid attention to it all that much but I did hear about it.  I'm still not sure what happened though.

Indeed. Long live the King!

2K Games has ruined Firaxis.

Stardock and Paradox Interactive for me are companies I respect.

Oh and Runic Games. I quite enjoy Torchlight. ^^

I used to be a TF 2 fanboy. Then they introduced that hat store, or "money maker" as I believe Valve calls it...

From personal experience, I would have to say Fallout fanboys. After the first Fallout 3 teaser came out, I could not have a rational discussion about the game for over a year with anyone on a forum, without some people doing their best to enforce their opinion as fact, regardless of how much evidence was show to the contrary. They they got mean.

The sad part, I wasn't aware Fallout fans could be volatile until Fallout 3.

But in all fairness, any person that gets too attached to something, especially a game, has the potential of turning into an unpleasant person, regardless of the game.

That being said, I consider myself bit of a TF2 fanboy, in the sense that I roleplay the Pyro, and consider it to be the most fun multiplayer FPS ever made. Yet even I am often amazed at the behavior of the e-sports component of the community.

In short, people can be mean regardless of context.

Let the defense of CiV begin:

Dale was right civ V, as ship or patch within a week, was virtually free of bugs, if you define a bug as to when the game comes crashing down.

End of Defence, let the trashing begin:

Of course just because the game plays, doesn't mean it is fun or challenging.  The AI CANNOT deal with 1 unit per Tile.  PERIOD. which breaks the game to the point of making you not want to play it.  Long bowmen firing over the English channel totally breaks the feel of the game, another necessity of 1 unit per tile.  And the selling of expansion packs before the AI is even compenent is sickening.

No more fraxis games for me.

Defintely Civilization fanboys. In the style of the old Romans they have a true disdain for anyone not as civilized as they are. (Or merely smelling differently, weiring diffrent colours)

Hey, Diar..., I can't think of anything wrong with your approach to 2k games Civ5 re: their marketing.  Canada is still a mixed economy (with strong free market attributes,) eh?

So you used the free market to send a message.  Isn't that exactly the argument all the 'laissez--faire' (free- market -on-steroids) corporations espouse?  You're showing them that part of the 'product' we purchase IS/are the forums.

So how those with control of those forums use (abuse) that power, is linked to the actual game.  If the manufacturer uses the forums SOLELY as a glorified commercial - then the players should return the game, and get a refund.  You sent the message (with a little help from your friends).  They received the message.  They emailed you.  I'm not sure if 100 units is enough to change their policies.  Probably (sadly) all the Corp will do is get slicker in their management of their forum.  

Hope i'm wrong.   Hope the corp actually sees the value of more open forum policies.  Like here on these forums.

CIV 4 fanboys. I find those the worst sort. It's a game, not a way of life.

I started with Civ 3, and imho if you like Civ 3 but didn't like the corruption/waste or pollution (and thought veterans should be stronger) then I think you should give Civ IV a shot.

Especially with FFH mod.

however, yea ... I to am skipping on Civ V for now, I no longer believe a game is worth buying until it is at least a year old.

I am glad you were so proactive.    2K Games deserves to go bankrupt.

It will be a cold day in hell before I buy another product associated with 2K Games unless major, major changes are undertaken with that company. I'm not holding my breath though.

I found the Civ3 editor corrected the excessive corruption/waste problem and made it a useful part of the game, and I liked the pollution. I also thought veterans were over powered in the regular game, but one could make veterans any way they wanted with the editor, even make them the same as conscripts or 10x more powerful. The way combat was modeled in Civ3 was a 100x better than the garbage in Civ4 with its single O/D factor and cheesy specials.

I initially tried the Civ4 demo when the game came out. My first impression is that this was a kid's game. You had animals running around knocking off units (lions and tigers and bears - OH MY!!!    ) which was very silly, childish and stupid. The previous barbarians were a much better idea. I liked how the game starts off announcing you had this group of nomadic hunter-gatherers and then after forming your first town, you get to research - hunting. Cheese. Later I got a chance to play the full game at a friend's place. He had the expansions, also. And I found the Civ4 cheese only got more ripe. You see, I look at the civ series as an all round strategy game, involving units interacting with each other, science & development, economics, the works. A little bit of everything that goes into making civilizations. In Civ4, they essentially removed the units from the equation by making them so basic. You had all these complicated other dynamics, but the units were an afterthought. Half the game for me is building the civilization, the other is messing around with the units. So with Civ4, they took away half the fun for me right there. But that was only part of the problems I had with getting into the game. The other was the way the development worked. There were too many steps that didn't add to game play. They only made the game more tedious. They were not modeled very realistically, either, in fact, realism wise, Civ4 was less realistic that Civ3 in its mechanics. An example would be the religion in Civ4. Pure limburger cheese, that. It added another layer of tedium, but in no way resembled religion or how it affected things in real history.

I came away from playing the game comparing it to MOO3 - way too much tedious "busy work", no immersion, and no real enjoyment of the game. They took away the wrong things and added too much "accounting" work, it felt like playing a combination of one of the sims (which I find really boring) and doing my taxes (no need to elaborate on that).  It didn't feel like I was playing a strategy game about civilizations. It felt more like a console game where the game play was an aspect that got left out.

I posted earlier in this thread as a joke, but this I had to respond to. Are you serious? Some of you'd be fine with them going bankrupt because of how you're treated on forums and because x-com changed into a game that you wouldn't purchase? Is it just me, or is there something completely silly about that comment? What about the Bioshock's, Borderlands', Mafia's, Elder Scrolls, etc.? You'd be fine with letting all those games go? And why just them, why not Take-Two as well, they're the ones in charge anyway.

It's one thing to not buy a game, and it's one thing to return games (although returning games because of how you're treated on FORUMS as someone mentioned above?!; you've got to be kidding), but when you want a company that makes quality games to go bankrupt because you feel bad about what they're doing, then you might have the problem, not them.