Originally posted by The_Aussie_Lurker
Had this game been built DIRECTLY on top of previous civ engines, then most of the above would probably not have bothered me. Yet they told us that this game was built FROM THE GROUND UP-and I felt that this gave them the perfect opportunity to make REALLY far reaching changes to some of the less stellar elements of the game, whilst introducing a heap of truly KILLER new features-something they seem to have avoided !
Had this game been built DIRECTLY on top of previous civ engines, then most of the above would probably not have bothered me. Yet they told us that this game was built FROM THE GROUND UP-and I felt that this gave them the perfect opportunity to make REALLY far reaching changes to some of the less stellar elements of the game, whilst introducing a heap of truly KILLER new features-something they seem to have avoided !
Soren said long ago that the design would be "1/3 old, 1/3 improved, 1/3 new". Religion is the big new thing, like culture and resources were the big new things in Civ3. There are many improvements, because many good ideas from SMAC are imported (esp. the social engineering). But it remains Civ, it hasn't become CtP or Europa Universalis. The franchise will continue to offer the same style of play, even in Civ5 and 6 (unless they radically change their design decision in the future, and decide to make a game that has nothing to do with the prequel bar the name - I don't see it coming)
Comment