So Basically We Have Civ 3...but in 3D?

[Adm.Naismith]

Re: So Basically We Have Civ 3...but in 3D?

Originally posted by yin26
I've been keeping loose tabs on the progress, and I know a few video interviews and screens can't tell the whole story, but the game just looks ...well... childish. Hard to think of a better word. HUGE, cartoony "units" slogging it out on goofy maps. Christ. They just don't get how to make maps, do they? I'm focused on the look of the game, of course, because I've heard NOTHING that suggest anything significantly changed in gameplay.

Hi Yin! Welcome back!
Don't beat too hard the newborn horse, please! Let him try a couple of run: you really shouldn't judge by the colour if it can win a Derby or not...

Originally posted by yin26
Seems so far like a kind of finger painter's version of checkers. Maybe the masses need the pointless graphics, but all I really see is a touch-up to a Civ 3 mess.

Graphics is ok for younger players and their money. A darker look would appeal a more mature (old like me and, to some point, you) audience, but given the common use of terrain and units modding, it's not a real annoyance, it's "skin" taste; think about Windows theme & wallpaper or any Linux KDE: you really don't judge the OS by its colour scheme, do you?

Originally posted by yin26
Firaxis' motto these days seems to be: "Why innovate?" Pirates 2. Civ 4. -- None of which was crafted by Sid himself. When they went down the path of something new (Dinos), they hit the abort button.

Dino was a mess, too early announced to the fanbase (but IMHO for keeping the publisher EA happy for a while). Firaxis explained at the end they tried Turn based, Real time and also First Person Dino engine: nothing seems to do the job in a good way, so they pulled the plug. Amen.

Civ III Conquests was good enough to spend some time playing, but I used city governors everywhere and sometime automate workers for the clean up of pollution: boring part of the game also at a middle level (regent/prince), IMHO. The limited amount of tactics available to win, compared with SMAC (ask Velociryx for reference), killed the game IMHO.
Civ IV seems more promising, because if I understand correctly Firaxis is now implementing some of "The List" suggestions, and is giving them a try.
I don't know if the game will be fresh enough: I'd prefer something more different on the root level, but I understand a sequel is a sequel: ask Hollywood for mixed examples.

Firaxis is writing code from scratch, and that's a gift from God IMO, to reduce the biting of bugs and free tester time for game balancing.

OTOH I'm afraid about AI coding. Last time Firaxis killed the strategy point because they chose a bad mantra: "any gamer idea is an exploit", so they put it out of the window nice concept (move the Palace became impossible, bad corruption killed the colonies concept more than ICS, AI nations' crazy trade of discoveries raised warmongering over building & researching, etc.).

Sorens must leave some freedom of strategic choice for the player, and try to give the AI the spin to compete, not sewering arms and legs to any human and try to sell it as an AI improvement...

Originally posted by yin26
Hate to say it: Civ is dead.

Well, not really, maybe it's a bit exaggerated news. It's not anymore a young promising athlete running for Olympics game, but a mature and expert adult that know some really good tricks and must cope with some rust and ache, as many basketball, baseball, gymnast, (put your sports here) old glories showed to us.
If the result still will come, we'd call him/her a legend, if not a sad late retirement.
OTOH, if any game company want to deliver a better "civ like" game, the players will play it and vote. I'm afraid TBS is now a town too small for two champions, and we can only hope for a bold indipendent idea that catch the publisher attention long enough for a starting contract.
My best wishes are for efforts like Snoopy & Jim or Vel and his Candle'Bra friends.

My friend Yin, please try putting some honey or sugar into your next cup of coffee or tea...
Oh, and don't forget my old signature...

[Aro]

Originally posted by Adagio


Two copies for you alone?

Yep. I keep one in my studio and the other at home.


I'm a , I know...

[Adm.Naismith]

[OT] Lasagne recipe

Originally posted by sophist
Or lasagna compared to semolina wheat, water, goat's milk, spinach, and tomatoes stirred together in a pot. You have to look past the ingredients and look at the sum of the parts.

I love your example, but I must really disagree about your choice of ingredients for a proper Italian Lasagne, Bolognese recipe.

[Aro]

Re: Re: So Basically We Have Civ 3...but in 3D?

Originally posted by Adm.Naismith

Graphics is ok for younger players and their money. A darker look would appeal a more mature (old like me and, to some point, you) audience ...

Well, graphics is ok for me, too (I was not born in December 31, 1969, as stated on my profile: try May 18, 1954 instead )
And a darker look would be nice, of course...
Sn00py, are you ready?

[Adagio]

I hope he's not too busy with his version of Civ to fix the graphics in Civ4... when released

[MarkG]

Originally posted by yin26
If ICS isn't still the dominant strategy in Civ 4, then I'll eat (at least part) of the cardboard box! And if combat isn't as dull as ever, I'll eat more parts!

saved for the future

[Harovan]

We demand pictures. And if they are good, a mug or t-shirt!

[yin26]

sophist: The difference between Civ 4 and an iPod, for instance, is that an iPod is a tool I can use to play *other* material. In this case, Civ 4 *is* the material...and if it's material that I have virtually memorized and can beat in my sleep, then what's the draw? Now, if I had only played Civ 1 (or maybe 2) but have skipped 3, then the jump to 4 might seem significant. So, from a player who ran 1, 2, 3 into the ground, 4 (from what we've seen) just doesn't seem to offer enough, even if it's a good game in its own right. By the way, my iPod can hold 10,000 songs in solid state. That's pretty darn impressive compared to a walkman!

EDIT: Well, it's on a hard drive, not solid state. But still darn impressive!

Aro: I'm glad some folks are ready to spend their money. Perhaps the game will be properly patched then.

Admiral: Well, hello! Yes, perhaps I expect an Olypic athlete. And you have, my friend, just confirmed in my mind that Firaxis is too scared/bored/worried to really keep the series fresh. But, as others have said, they like the series just fine as it is. Fair enough. But how much predicatable Civ can a person play in one lifetime? I guess Poly will have that stat for us.

Markos: Of course, somebody will have to send a copy of the game for me to review ...and, possibly, eat. Right?

[Zoid]

Originally posted by yin26

Markos: Of course, somebody will have to send a copy of the game for me to review ...and, possibly, eat. Right?

If you pose for some pics while eating I´m sure Markos will spring for a game

[yin26]

Naaah. Markos is too cheap, always grumbling about the costs of running a Website or something. But that Aro guy...he's going to have extra copies!

[sophist]

Yin, yes, ipods and civ4 are different. That's why I named a couple of more examples. Lots of little, intelligent changes can have a seemingly disproportionate effect. The whole can be greater than the sum of its parts. I understand your skepticism, but it's a little premature. We only know some of the ingredients, not how they've been "baked." Something that seems small and insignificant on the civ4 news page could in fact have a profound effect. Or it might not. You just have to keep an open mind until you can see the whole thing the way it was meant to be seen.

Adm.Naismith, vegetarian, so no bolognese.

[Aro]

Originally posted by yin26
Naaah. Markos is too cheap, always grumbling about the costs of running a Website or something. But that Aro guy...he's going to have extra copies!

I'll be glad to send you one of my two cardboard box, as soon as the game is released. I'll save the other, just in case.

[Ninot]

Yin's right, on all accounts!

I'm still gonna pay 50$ tho . I'll try to be honest in my opinion about it too.

edited in: Rise of Nations is truly a great game. Never before have I played an RTS multiplayer, and beaten a guy while using less troops from an earlier era. I beat a guy who had WW2 era troops with some well positioned Musketloading troops. Call that a click fest, i dare ya!

[Imran Siddiqui]

Btw, what is all this crap about Civ 2.5, 2.7? It's just an attempt to seem 'cool', IMO. What about Civ 2 makes it '2' instead of Civ 1.5 or something?

In fact, IIRC, on an IRC chat, I ran into someone that said Civ 1 was the only one worth anything in the series and Civ 2 was just Civ 1 with minimal changes (iso view, firepower, etc)... kind of the same thing Yin is saying with Civ 4 compared to Civ 3.

What makes Civ 2 revolution and Civ 4 not?

[General Ludd]

Civ 2 isn't a revolution gameplay wise, it's really just a refreshing of the original with good graphics and an updated design and layout. However, given the era that the two games where made, the update was signifigant and needed. That isn't the case anymore.