Civilization is not for 3 year olds.

[Jon Shafer]

Well, look at all of Firaxis' more recent games... SimGolf, Pirates, even Civ 3 in a way all have a general cartoony stylish feel. As a review I read earlier said about Pirates, it's not a dark game (which it easily could have been) but aims to get to the alure of being a Pirate in a lighthearted way. It's not a game meant to actually mimic reality. Sid seems to like that trend very much, and it wouldn't surprise me if Civ 4 were the same way for that reason.

[The diplomat]

I definitely want a serious game. I did not like the caricature leaders that we got in civ3. if they want animated leaders then give us serious looking leaders or use portraits or paintings or something. The game had a potentially very good diplomacy model that was ruined by the caricature leaders and the ridiculous one-liners.

[Apocalypse]

Well, part of the reason for the units looking like that was because of having bright colors to tell units apart more easier. This it had success in.

[FrostyBoy]

Originally posted by Trip
Well, look at all of Firaxis' more recent games... SimGolf, Pirates, even Civ 3 in a way all have a general cartoony stylish feel. As a review I read earlier said about Pirates, it's not a dark game (which it easily could have been) but aims to get to the alure of being a Pirate in a lighthearted way. It's not a game meant to actually mimic reality. Sid seems to like that trend very much, and it wouldn't surprise me if Civ 4 were the same way for that reason.

exactly why I am so concerned for cIV.

It's like the Batman movies, each one got worse than the last.

Firaxis need to do a radical change, they need to go back to their roots (Civ1, Civ2). update Civ2 to cIV, not Civ3 to cIV

[Modo44]

Civ 1 had the most silly looks so far. The units looked even more ridiculous than the ones on the recent CIV screenies. So did the terrain, and so did other things. Sure, you could argue that graphics back then couldn't be better. But they could have been "darker" - they just weren't. As long as it is only graphics, I don't mind. If the graphics are too childish, I'm sure there will be enough people willing to do more "grown up" stuff for us (like realistic terrain mods ).

My concern is only with the game complexity. There isn't enough info so far, IMO, to talk about it. Complaining about things we simply don't know, now that would be silly, wouldn't it?



Actually, update SMAC to CIV.

[FrostyBoy]

Okay, I am not specifically talking about the graphics of Civ, I am talking about the complexity, depthness and seriousness of the gameplay itself. I'm not complaining about what I don't know, I'm concerned for cIV's fate, and I have every right to be considering Firaxis line of previous games.

[Modo44]

I find Civ3 to be the most complex, and difficult of the whole series. I like SMAC for it's looks and love to detail, true. But if the challenge is considered, Civ3 wins by a large margin. I'd like the dark looks of SMAC, but I don't think they'll make it to CIV, because the Civ games always had something silly about them. Still, I don't think the complexity will be lost because of this.

A thing people seem to confuse is streamlining, and simplicity. Just because it's easy to issue complex orders, doesn't make them simple, or easy to plan. MOO3 can show you the way. A very complex game, but with great controls that allow a fluid game without excess micromanagement. Doing this in CIV would be quite an achievement.

[Alex]

Originally posted by Modo44
MOO3 can show you the way. A very complex game, but with great controls that allow a fluid game without excess micromanagement. Doing this in CIV would be quite an achievement.

I really really hope they don't listen to you...

MOO3

[Modo44]

Originally posted by Alex
I really really hope they don't listen to you...

MOO3

Hey, I didn't like the graphics either. Nor did I enjoy the crappy space battles. Other things were messed up as well. But the way you could control the whole infrastructure/economy/military build up without too much MM - that was great IMO.

[Kuciwalker]

You know, only three year olds would decide merely from the graphics and interface of a game whether it is serious.

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by Modo44
But the way you could control the whole infrastructure/economy/military build up without too much MM - that was great IMO.

Except for the fact that if you did not fine tune your ship designs constantly, the AI would build 200 troopships that you couldn't use.

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by Alex


I really really hope they don't listen to you...

MOO3

There is a difference between serious and complex. I think a game can be serious without being super complex. For example, Rome:Total War. It's a serious empire building game that is not overly complex.

[Modo44]

Originally posted by The diplomat
Except for the fact that if you did not fine tune your ship designs constantly, the AI would build 200 troopships that you couldn't use.

By referring to MOO3, I meant this screen, which gives great control over the empire, without doing anything to each planet alone. Like I said, other things about the game were far from great.

[Alex]

Originally posted by Modo44

By referring to MOO3, I meant this screen, which gives great control over the empire, without doing anything to each planet alone. Like I said, other things about the game were far from great.

You see, the concept of less micromanagement is really good, but that very screen you posted shows how a game can be deep enough to the point of being inane: I don't want to play a spreadsheet.

[Modo44]

Originally posted by Alex
You see, the concept of less micromanagement is really good, but that very screen you posted shows how a game can be deep enough to the point of being inane: I don't want to play a spreadsheet.

Civ3 is deeper, especially on huge maps. The difference is, the crappy interface makes you micromanage each darned build queue, each worker, and each citizen, instead of setting up all in one place. Sorry, but that's no fun to me. I'd rather have the "spreadsheet" in place.