anyone else afraid of a PC and appeal to the masses cIV?

[DeathByTheSword]

from what i read so far i am really looking forward to november (i know what i am going to ask for my b-day) but i heard also a lot of things that scare me...

it looks to me that they (firaxis) is trying to hard to not offend anyone and thus leave a lot of cool stuff (like civil war and terrorist actions) out of the game and down playing new cool stuff (religion mostly). i am kinda afraid this will screw up with the game

also removing a lot of 'unfun' elements we keep hearing about...it looks like they want to make a civ that is so simple and easy that everybody could play it...no problem with that...but i loved all those unfun elements because they made you plan...thus i am also afraid we will get a very blank and generic civ 4 which will be way to straight forward.


anyone else share my ideas?

[Ninot]

In a way I get the same feeling, especially with Civil wars.

But in another way, I have a feeling that while the learning curve might be smaller, those who chose to practice and master the game will find much more depth and strategy.

I have a feeling that mixing Religion with Diplomacy will make for much more complicated and interesting diplomacy than the simple "whos strongest? lets team up on them" brand of old.

And I also have a feeling that the Promotions system for Units will not be neccesary for newbies, but will help veteran players make their armies very detailed, complex, and something no newbie could match.

[DerSchwarzfalke]

I am unsure what their logic is in leaving civil wars out. Who is going to be offended by a civil war?

[Solver]

Terrorism isn't out only because of PC issues, I'm fairly sure. Admittedly, it wouldn't work well within the game.

Bonuses for religions would probably be cool, but it should be very easy to mod in, I expect such a mod will appear soon after the release.

As for removing unfun elements... they never said they're removing them. They said they're replacing them with something else. ollution was an element in Civ3, yet it was absolutely boring and contributed nothing to gameplay. Pollution is replaced by a health concept in Civ4 - which we can assume will be more fun.

[curtsibling]

I can imagine 'terrorism' is not in because there is not really
a civ called 'Terrorisia' that spews out turbaned baddies.

And the concept of what terrorism actually is differs in the
minds of everyone. I think terrorism makes little real impact
on the world as a whole and has minimal value in the game
of civ anyway. It is a classic case of people watching one
Bruce Willis movie too many...Civ is not about that junk.

[Mace]

I wouldn't worry too much about Civ4 "appealing to the masses" and being PC. If it is indeed as moddable as they say, mods will appear, adding in all of the un-PC things, and all of the things that don't "appeal to the masses."

Look at the Amazons units for Civ3. They feature some scantily (or less) -clad ladies. You didn't see THAT in stock Civ3, did you?

[Paddy]

yeah the mods will be racing their works

the forums will certainly have some great threads on such matters very quickly

[Kuciwalker]

Re: anyone else afraid of a PC and appeal to the masses cIV?

No. Frankly, I don't give a flying **** if it's PC.

[Kataphraktoi]

But in another way, I have a feeling that while the learning curve might be smaller, those who chose to practice and master the game will find much more depth and strategy.

games with low learning curves are shallow. if i could master the game within days or weeks,whats the point? to elevate everyone to expert level?or reduce everyone to 'rookie' level?

[Adagio]

Just because it has a low learning curve doesn't mean it can't be deep. It just makes it easier for newbies to learn the game so they can beat the game on average diffeculty, while the game can still be hard for veterans to master the game

[Mace]

we all should hope that it's deep. If they put out a game that we could all master in 10 times, we'd quit playing it pretty fast. They know that... don't worry..

[Solver]

Originally posted by Cataphract887


games with low learning curves are shallow. if i could master the game within days or weeks,whats the point? to elevate everyone to expert level?or reduce everyone to 'rookie' level?

We DO officially have a new Coracle.

[alva]

Who's says anything about 'new'.

I basically stopped with RTS games because of the high learning curve. Soren is right on the mark on that (he made a comment on it somewhere).
I don't know if I would spend the time time to learn Civ, if it kept getting more and more complicated, what's 'simple' for us - because we have years of experience - can be damned hard for people new to both the genre and game.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Cataphract887
games with low learning curves are shallow. if i could master the game within days or weeks,whats the point? to elevate everyone to expert level?or reduce everyone to 'rookie' level?

There's a difference between a low learning curve and a game that you can master in days or weeks. Chess has virtually no learning curve at all. Civ has a relatively far steeper one. Guess which game is more difficult to master.

And WTF does that have to do with PC?

[fuji]

lower learning curve, appealing to the masses.

Anyway, dropping terrorism isn't going to matter much. In Civ3, how many times did you poison a water supply? As long as pillaging and plundering are in, we'll be fine.

Maybe Firaxis or Take Two are worried they won't get that E rating from ESRB..?