What's in Civ4. Just the facts, ma'am.

[Solver]

Isn't Soren doing any of the coding job himself?

And I hope that Sid is really involved with this one, not just being a name on the box and playing the game a bit. After all, the game will be much better if Sid does indeed conribute to its development.

[dacole]

Originally posted by Trip

How about you actually learn more about the game before casting it off as a failure?

Iwill be but what I've heard recently has left me worried.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Solver
Isn't Soren doing any of the coding job himself?

Nah, they have monkeys to do the coding. Soren's doing the REAL work

And I hope that Sid is really involved with this one, not just being a name on the box and playing the game a bit. After all, the game will be much better if Sid does indeed conribute to its development.

“But my most exciting career accomplishment? Hands down: working at Firaxis with Soren Johnson and Sid Meier on the next (and better than ever) version of Civilization.” -- Jesse Smith, Civ4 Producer (source)

[Solver]

“But my most exciting career accomplishment? Hands down: working at Firaxis with Soren Johnson and Sid Meier on the next (and better than ever) version of Civilization.” -- Jesse Smith, Civ4 Producer

Well, it's an official statement on the corporate webpage... he could not fail to mention Sid there. Besides, "working with Sid" is not really specific. It could mean Sid is closely following the development, or it could mean he takes a look at the current build every Friday for 20 minutes.

[Civrules]

I think that Dan Magaha is still working on Pirates! on the Xbox, and not on Civ IV yet.

[Locutus]

Originally posted by Solver
Well, it's an official statement on the corporate webpage... he could not fail to mention Sid there.

It's the only place one the site where such a thing is posted. It's a company, of which Sid is an employee/shareholder, not a religious institution of which Sid is the god (though we'd often like to think otherwise )

Besides, "working with Sid" is not really specific. It could mean Sid is closely following the development, or it could mean he takes a look at the current build every Friday for 20 minutes.

When Soren says Firaxians are playing 4-hours MP games in their own time, this *could* mean that they only did this once, that the graphics were ASCII-based and the rules simpler than checkers. Using that attitude this fact list would be very, very short indeed...

Originally posted by CivR
I think that Dan Magaha is still working on Pirates! on the Xbox, and not on Civ IV yet.

He's credited for CivIV on the Firaxis website as well. Can't imagine he's the producer (hence the question mark), but he's credited so he must be doing something for that game...

[Jon Shafer]

Originally posted by CivR
I think that Dan Magaha is still working on Pirates! on the Xbox, and not on Civ IV yet.

Yes, that's correct. Soren is also doing coding as well as design.

[Solver]

When Soren says Firaxians are playing 4-hours MP games in their own time, this *could* mean that they only did this once, that the graphics were ASCII-based and the rules simpler than checkers. Using that attitude this fact list would be very, very short indeed...

You know, that could really mean it, after all, Firaxis also said that Civ3 is shipping with cool new multiplayer modes, and it shipped with none whatsoever. I was not/am not angry at Firaxis for that, but this is just to show that things developers say may unfortunately not be as good as they sound.

[Addled Platypus]

Originally posted by Solver

You know, that could really mean it, after all, Firaxis also said that Civ3 is shipping with cool new multiplayer modes, and it shipped with none whatsoever.

AMEN BROTHER

I will wait till I see the box in my hand. NO MP...NO Buy

[Solver]

I'm not that extreme in that case, but mainly because I am interested in SP much more. It will be quite some time after release that I will try MP, I guess six weeks at least.

However... I really, really want to see all major feautures that are promised to make it into the game. If they promise PBEM, I want to see it in. If they promise all data exposed to XML and scritable AI (which were the first things revealed about the game), I'd hate to see it suddenly go.

[bigvic]

i, the lazy lurker, after reading almost the first 2 pages of this thread have just decided 2 skip down to here and blab my 2 cents, so if anything i say has been hashed out completely in the previous couple of pages, my apologies....

that said, here are a few of the elements i hope they borrow from other games....

1. either those resource sucker units from smac or the ctp2 increased ever growble city radius (or even both)

2. something more in line with ctp2's combat system. i think fewer units is better for gameplay, and preferable if handled right. civ3 kind of suffers on the tactical level and the ctp2 battle army with each unit representing different roles/capability provided just enough tactical element to work. plus, for its time it was cool eye candy - some kind of 3d eye candy with what they can do now would be fun, even i the old strategy curmudgeon must admit. i liked the unit stacking limits, the ability to just form armies w/o having to build freakin wonders,. i hate micromanaging a zillion freaking units when the same strategic purpose, and feel can be done with less individual units. does that make sense? i liked smac's ability to allow other faction units 2 go into allied cities too - why did they stop that? You know, come to think of it, the tactical combat system of civ3 is one of the games weakest features. i never got over the "kill 1 unit kill the whole stack" sin of early civs, which means i was an early convert to ctp (actually started there - does it show?), and through smac and civ3 the tactical combat situation has improved, but nonetheless i would like to see an overal improvement in this arena.

3. the global achievements of ctp2 were nice.

4. teleporting multilayer maps rock....(civ2tot, ctp1)

5. "please call off your vendetta against my friend, the..." smac had better diplomacy than civ3 imho, and gal civ with its multiple ai engines is good too, very strong in this area.


ok, now a few (very few) things i would like to see but either never have or almost never have seen in these games but am either doubtful or foggy about...i know that didn't quite make sense, but here goes...

1. civil wars - yeah u kind of had it in ctp, and u kind of have it a little more in galciv, but this could be incorporated into a kind of "webbing" of civs, alllowing a vast number of civs to be included but limiting how many exist at once. heck, u could even be given the choice of taking control of the newly spawned civ instead of your old one

2. along the vein of #1, above, i would really like to see the REAL next generation of this genre of games, one that incorporates more realism and workable, fun game mechanics (i swear it can be done, the three are not mutually exclusive!)

whew! for the lazy lurker that was one heck of a long post. (can u say "hell" around here anymore? i saw "ass" somewhere on another thread i think the 2 seem to have become commonly accepted as not quite 2 nasty and i would not want to offend anyone - not really)

[bigvic]

oh yeah, and a big pet peeve don't...

1. don't design units the ai wont use at least sometimes and make sure the ai uses them at a levell a tiny bit above grade A moron capacity - artillery in civ3 - ugghhh!

[Locutus]

Update: I completely reorganised the opening post by grouping information about similar subjects together. This should make it easier to manage the thread as more information is made available and will also make it easier to find stuff if you're looking for something specific. I had planned this for some time but was waiting with it until the new information January was supposed to bring would be released, but as the month draws to a close it seems more and more likely that the PC Gamer previews are all we're getting for the time being -- so I went ahead and did it anyway. If you read the OP before, you don't need to bother reading it again, there's not much new info in it (just on Soren's comments on The List, the rumour that Take2 will be the publisher and some other minor tidbits that the regulars will already know about). Future updates will be clearly marked and announced (as was the case until now).

[Spiffor]

Wow, excellent work Locutus. Thanks very much for the info

[Spiffor]

Re: Re: What's in Civ4. Just the facts, ma'am.

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
Doesn't this concern *anyone*? Most people here didn't like Civ3 because it was too "streamlined". Yes, simplifying unfun parts of a game can be a good thing and can even make the game a little deeper, however Civ3 taught us that too much is quite a bad thing, and I do not yet feel confident enough in trusting Firaxis not to botch the game

I am not overly concerned about it, though I will certainly gather information before buying CivIV (i.e., not buying blindingly)

The mantra to "simplify simplify" may mean two things:
- reduce micromanagement, and have the player mostly take "big picture" decisions while restricting the tedious and repetitive work. This idea also suggests a simplification of the interface.
- reduce the complexity of the game so that it appeals to newbies that are completely clueless and will remain so.

The first idea was already present back when Brian Johnson designed SMAC. The Governors in SMAC and the automation of the formers were a fist step in reducing the repetitive tasks originally perfomed by the player. Civ3 considerably streamlined the interface of the game, and the new interface was a great success ; especially, the interface of diplomacy had the potential to be a simple interface for very complex diplomacy (in the end, Civ3's diplomacy was less complex than SMAC's, but Civ3's diplomatic interface would have allowed for even more)

I personally think Civ4 will strongly emphasize on the first idea. The old-style pollution is gone, and it was a typical example of boring repetitive work. Multi-weapons armies are encouraged, which means there will be far less individual units to move (you'll move the whole army, not one unit at a time).

Now, it is possible that many of SMAC options won't be back indeed. I fear they don't include "Please make peace with my friend" back, as well as unit-trading (I LOVE unit-trading, and its absence in Civ3 is probably my single most important beef with the game).

But I don't see Civ4 as a massive dumbing-down of the previous Civ titles. Some things will be gone indeed, and I can already hear some people saying "damn you Firaxis for removing corruption! You only sell to clueless newbies and leave us complex-minded fans in the cold!". Heck, maybe I'll even be one of those guys.
However, Civ4 also add new things. Religion is likely to spice up the culture model. Maybe it will even completely overhaul it "Civics" will probably allow you to fine-tune your government better than in classical Civ - maybe it will be social engineering, maybe it'll be a few bonuses or maluses reflecting your "political" decisions, or maybe it will be something completely new.

These new areas of the game will offer complexity where the gone ones have left.