note: This is The Column, a part of Apolyton where anyone can write about whatever he/she wants :) If you feel like writing, submit your article via the article submission page

PREVIOUS ARTICLES

#81 THE FORUMS HAVEN'T TAKEN OVER APOLYTON, BUT... In response to Iain's article, Markos wants a chance at a rebuttal. #82 PLUNGE INTO THE ToT FANTASY WORLD Toby Robison wants the Fantasy-realm of Civ to get the attention it deserves. #83 THE SWING OF PENDULUM IN GAMING What goes up, goes down, and vice cersa, says Imran #84 PET PEEVES OF MULTIPLAY War4Ever speaks out against some aspects of multiplayer gaming. #85 SCENARIO MAKING: WHY CIV2 SUCCEEDED WHILE MORE MODERN GAMES MAY FAIL Blackclove puts C:CTP on the hotspot for what he sees as a lack of customizability. COLUMN ARCHIVE

First of all, let me say I have been a Civ-Series gamer for 10 years. I like and actively play Civ2, Civ2:ToT, SMAC and CTP. This is in no way a bash of Civ2 but more of a call for acceptance of others.

Once again, CTP is being put down because it doesn't compare to Civ2. It is treated like an ugly stepchild and not worth the space on a shelf. When, in fact, it is actually the other way around. Civ2 can't compare to CTP. Why does this happen? Why does all the game bashing go on? In particular, the die-hard Civ2ers love to bash CTP. I think you will find the real answer is they don't like change and simply are not able to embrace anything different. CTP is so significantly different that it threatens their known comfortable status quo. Folks, this is like comparing apples to oranges. The Civ2 series is a 10-year-old game while CTP is just a baby at one. Civ2 is the old style of creative gameplay while CTP is the new generation of gaming. Lets face it, the current Civ2 is built on an engine that is at least 5 years old. In a time when new technology becomes obsolete in 3 months, 5 years is a long, long time. I feel pretty confident in saying these same people will bash Civ3 when it comes out. Namely, because Civ3 is going to be closer to CTP than Civ2. Like it or not, game play is going to keep getting more and more complicated, as is scenario building. This is the nature of the business. We, the gamer, are driving this change and the game company has to produce 'Bigger & Better' to keep up. If they don't, they will be left by the wayside. We want more options, more speed, more customization, smarter AI and on and on. We want it all and we want it on our terms. If you doubt this, take a tour of the Civ3 section here at Apolyton. Or take a look at Civ2:ToT. This is strictly an attempt to add these newer features to an old game. Civ2 is leaving their 'great customizable, easy graphically modifiable' program and embracing the new 3-D animated, multi-genre (land, sea space) world. They have had to do this to stay in the race with SMAC and CTP. This is the only way they could keep their product in the spotlight. You need to ask yourself, if Civ2 is the best thing since sliced bread, why is Civ3 based on the SMAC engine instead of the Civ2 engine. It is because that gives it a new and improved base to build from. With all this in mind, I say quit comparing them. Accept each for what it is, good points, bad points and all.

Now, let's take a look at scenarios. Yes, Civ2 scenarios are probably easier. They should be, they have had 10 years to get it right. If you remove the multi-language and 'one minor change only' versions of scenarios, you have something more like Civ2:200, CTP:10 scenarios. Take a close look at what is left. Most of the Civ2 scenarios are virtually identical with only some minor graphics changes or small tech change. Also, Civ2 scenarios are the proverbial 'One-Shot Wonder'. You play it once and never see it again. CTP, on the other hand, lets you modify every aspect of the game, including the way the AI thinks, acts and reacts. CTP mods are also incorporated into the game and used time after time as the default files.

Okay, how about those graphics (and the inherent conflict with scenario design). The newer 3-D, multi-posing graphics are not harder from a graphics standpoint. They are more complicated from a technical, creative standpoint. Anybody able to make non-laughable graphics for Civ2 has the ability to make CTP graphics. They just need to understand the newer file formats. A basic unit, instead of a 5-facing unit, works just as well in CTP, thank you. In fact, I use no multi-movement, animated graphics in my CTP games. With CTP, you simply don't need as many new units. The basic units go a lot farther. The fact that people are teaming up on scenarios has nothing to do with the quality of graphics and everything to do with creating a newer, high-quality scenario.

Should we dig into the 'rules'?

1) All rules customized in external text files. Civ2 might have pioneered this but CTP perfected it. CTP not only has external text files for modifying everything but it has a much stronger programming ability. 2) Make all art modifiable. Again the art in CTP is quite modifiable and you have many options from basic, still to 3-D, animated. 3) Have the ability to turn-off the graphics. In CTP, you can. Everything is able to be turned-off from animation to videos to monuments.

I would like to now offer my own 3 rules in regard to gaming.

1) Always have an open mind. Drop the 'This isn't Civ2 so I just won't like it attitude'. 2) Thoroughly learn the game, inside and out. How can you say a game is no good when you haven't even learned how to play? 3) Remember that change is inevitable. Accept the fact that the tried and true will not last forever.

If you are unable to accept CTP or SMAC, you will not be able to accept Civ3 either. The glory days of Civ2 are over. It is time to usher in the new frontiers in gaming.

---------
Don Blevens (skorpion59) owns his own network consulting company.

Want to comment on this article?

The opinions expressed on this page do not necessarily reflect those of Apolyton CS or GameStats. They are just the personal opinions of the writer.