Why are they bothering to make Civ 4?

[Protra3211]

I think that its more than money. Civilization is a game many faithfull fans worship and spent alot of their time playing. Most pc games are forgotten after a short time.
Knowing what they have in this game and the number ffans must give them a sense of pride.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by ashbery
There's nothing silly about it.Alpha centauri has bucketloads more depth than any civ game before or after.

That's certainly a matter of opinion, but regardless of whether or not it's true that SMAC trumps all existing civ games in this regards, the claim that future civ games can't possibly do better is, indeed, silly. It's a baseless assertion borne simply out of bias, unless the dear DL has some sort of prognosticative power.

[ashbery]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


That's certainly a matter of opinion, but regardless of whether or not it's true that SMAC trumps all existing civ games in this regards, the claim that future civ games can't possibly do better is, indeed, silly. It's a baseless assertion borne simply out of bias, unless the dear DL has some sort of prognosticative power.

The Sid doctrine is very clear for the future .Simplify,simplify,simplify.There will never be a complex game like AlphaC from Firaxis again.

[Addled Platypus]

Re: Re: Why are they bothering to make Civ 4?

Originally posted by Ninot


why did they bother?

because Sid Meier hates you personally.
.

Let Sid keep on hating all of us then

Long Live Sid and the Civ series


pleaaasse post intelligent remarks and not just bashing

anyone can bash .... who can be intelligent

[Ninot]

Re: Re: Re: Why are they bothering to make Civ 4?

Originally posted by Platypus Rex


Let Sid keep on hating all of us then

Long Live Sid and the Civ series


pleaaasse post intelligent remarks and not just bashing

anyone can bash .... who can be intelligent

i was intelligent later on in that post

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by ashbery
The Sid doctrine is very clear for the future .Simplify,simplify,simplify.There will never be a complex game like AlphaC from Firaxis again.

So the change from fixed governments to sliders in Cvi4 (which mirrors SMAC) supports this theory...how? Or the addition of promotions for units? Or the variations added to great leaders? There are oodles of examples from Civ4 of increased complexity that I can see.

I don't see anything about Civ4 that's reducing complexity in a bad way. Care to cite any examples?

Most of what I see seems to be enriching the gameplay experience. Simplification is not always a bad thing.

How about the piss-poor SMAC AI, huh? How does that render it more "complex"? I'd take Civ3's AI over SMAC's any day of the week.

Of course, this is all besides the point that you have utterly no way of knowing what the future may hold for Civ games. Firaxis will likely not be the only company to hold the rights to it, and I'm sure the franchise will endure long after Sid is gone.

[ElConejo]

Re: Re: Re: Why are they bothering to make Civ 4?

Originally posted by Platypus Rex
Long Live Sid and the Civ series

*Chanting all day long to himself*

So the change from fixed governments to sliders in Cvi4 (which mirrors SMAC) supports this theory...how? Or the addition of promotions for units? Or the variations added to great leaders? There are oodles of examples from Civ4 of increased complexity that I can see.

I don't see anything about Civ4 that's reducing complexity in a bad way. Care to cite any examples?

Thank you! Couldnt have said it better myself.

[Darkstar]

For them? Money. For the gaming public? A new game in the genre of Civ to play! Opportunities to have fun learning the new game framework, fun trying out the new or changed features, and to have the state of Civ games advanced.

I personally find SMAC to be a better game then Civ3. I prefer having the ability to design my own government and design the kind of units I need. I like the semi-random research option. Civ3 has some interesting features, but I don't find it has as strongly an immersive atmosphere as SMAC. But to each their own.

[patcon]

Originally posted by Protra3211
I think that its more than money. Civilization is a game many faithfull fans worship and spent alot of their time playing. Most pc games are forgotten after a short time.
Knowing what they have in this game and the number ffans must give them a sense of pride.

You're absolutely right, a company as rich as Firaxis has no need of more money. They're in it so when the game manufacturers get together for beer and pretzels, they can hold up their heads with pride.

By the way, I happen to hold the deed for a very well-respected bridge in NYC which has brought me great pride in my life. You seem like the kind of person who would appreciate owning such a pride-inspiring piece of real estate. I would be happy (and proud) to transfer the deed to you in exchange for 10 millions buckets of pride.

[Protra3211]

Thats a key point Darkstar brought up - immersive atmostphere. Felt that Civ3 was a good game along with the many great mods but lacked in this area.

Now I hope they bother to perfect this in Civ4!

[Solver]

The SMAC atmosphere is really hard to beat. However, Civ4 will be more atmospheric than Civ3 almost no matter what they do - Civ3 was a very bland game with almost no atmospheric touches to it that I can think of it.

[Dis]

did they mention if they would bring back wonder movies and advisors?

I miss the military advisor in civ2.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Solver
The SMAC atmosphere is really hard to beat.

In terms of being a complete turn-off, yes

[ashbery]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


In terms of being a complete turn-off, yes

For simple folk,yes.

[Solver]

did they mention if they would bring back wonder movies and advisors?

Wonder movies were mentioned.