Why are they bothering to make Civ 4?

[Protra3211]

Patcon - what I meat was that the creative genius of Sid is in his games he makes. Its more than money it takes talent and creative focus . Without that he never would make any money at this in the first place
Also why not have pride in what you do. I work as a machinst and try to respect what I do .Without it your just a slob.

[Harovan]

Great thread! I needed a good dance anyway. Thanks for the opportunity.

DL!

[Senethro]

Keep the OT out of here pls.

Theres a very good reason why SMAC AI isn't as comparatively good as Civ3 AI. As Civ3 is a simpler game its easier to tell the AI players how to evaluate a situation and what moves they should make. In SMAC I'm lucky if I can make my AIs build a few colony pods.

This may be the reason why many active SMACers at 'poly are also PBEMers. As a long time player of strongly competitive games I am quite distressed by the casual Civ players' hermetic single-player-only behaviour.

[Kuciwalker]

Theres a very good reason why SMAC AI isn't as comparatively good as Civ3 AI.

Yes, because it's crap.

As Civ3 is a simpler game its easier to tell the AI players how to evaluate a situation and what moves they should make.

[patcon]

Protra - I was goofin' on ya

I absolutely agree that being able to take pride in what you do is critical to being both good at what you do and happy with what you do. I'm a high school teacher and everyday when people ask "How ya doin'?" I answer "Thrilled to be here." Some people think I'm being sarcastic, but I'm not - I love my work, I consider myself the luckiest (if not the best-paid) guy on the planet. OK, I get to teach the best kids in a really good school - calculus and physics, so I have a different set of challenges then most teachers - but I'm damn good at what I do and I'm very proud of it.

[M. le Comte]

Re: Why are they bothering to make Civ 4?

Originally posted by Pandaemonium
Civ 3 wasn't as good as Alpha Centauri, and Civ 4 won't be, either. I'd pay 50 bucks for a copy of Alpha Centauri before I ever spent a dime on Civ 3, because it's a much much better game, and I don't think Civ 4 will be any better.

Alpha Centauri has more depth, personality, and mystique than a Civ game can possibly have. I just don't see the point.

To my mind,

Pandaemonium (Panda is his nickname)

works for Activision...

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker

Theres a very good reason why SMAC AI isn't as comparatively good as Civ3 AI.

Yes, because it's crap.

Good point. I applaud you.

As Civ3 is a simpler game its easier to tell the AI players how to evaluate a situation and what moves they should make.

Again a masterly rebuttal. Pretty spot on.

I tell you what, skywalker. I may agree with Senethro or not (I tend to agree, but not 100%), but after your "rebuttal" his point still stands, albeit unproven, while you plain and simple failed to deliver one.

I beg you to clarify your point. "Because it is crap" does not add to the argument. "It is crap, because ... (add your analysis here)" however would.

[Harovan]

Oh, and ...

Originally posted by Senethro
Keep the OT out of here pls.

It has nothing to do with OT or not, but rather with displaying disrespect for somebody, who invades the forum for a game in development with no other reason than to spout destructive statements. While I know well, that ridiculing somebody is not a good debating strategy, some people deserve no other treatment. I will gladly engage in a mature debate, however only if my counterpart does the same and is not just trolling like the original poster, because in this case he deserves no other than either being ignored (which sadly did not happen in this thread) or countertrolled.

[thinkingamer]

Btw, I love History to death and I do not care nothing about star trek, star wars, etc.

Yet I thought Alpha Centauri was way better than Civ3.

[thinkingamer]

One must know that one thing that SMAC really suffers is the learning curve. Back then even after i beat Civ2 few times in dety level, learning SMAC was at least as hard as relearning Civ game from scratch.

If u get past that, the game is superb. Better diplomacy, lots of faction "personality" (which makes Civ3 civilization look like a Age or Emp. 2 rip-off), more options, etc. etc.

Civ3 had better AI.


I hope firaxis would not make the same mistake; I did learn from my mistake (after buying civ 3) that I should never buy a pc game before I read any of the fan reviews.

[AeonOfTime]

Oh how absolutely delightingly wonderful - another SMAC vs Civ3 thread... didn't it originally mention Civ4 being worthless?

As for why Firaxis 'even' bothers to make a new Civilization - I guess the main reason should naturally be money. Other than that, I think they also do it because they like Civilization a lot themselves. From all the info I have seen on the game so far I get the impression they really put a lot of thought into it and are trying to add some interesting fresh elements.

Oh, and if they were only doing a 'shake the money tree riding on a good franchise' sequel, we would already have noticed. Even if they fail to make it a good game (which I seriously doubt) it won't be because they didn't put enough efforts in it.

[Harovan]

I think another reason for making Civ4 may be an attempt to restore reputation. They blew Civ3 and they know it, Sorens broadly published presentation proves it, IIRC it was even named "Don't blow it" or at least similar. Civ3 was made under very bad circumstances, this may be a reason for it. Many enjoyed it, myself included, but overall it was a disappointment, in many ways short of what it could have been.

Making a Civ4, which is as enjoyable as Civ2, as complex as SMAC, as moddable as CTP1/2 and at the same time simple to handle and immersive - with other words squaring the circle - is a great challenge and if it is coming out as well as it looks now, deserves our high tribute.

[LarryLard]

Re: Why are they bothering to make Civ 4?

Originally posted by Pandaemonium
Civ 3 wasn't as good as Alpha Centauri, and Civ 4 won't be, either. I'd pay 50 bucks for a copy of Alpha Centauri before I ever spent a dime on Civ 3, because it's a much much better game, and I don't think Civ 4 will be any better.

Alpha Centauri has more depth, personality, and mystique than a Civ game can possibly have. I just don't see the point.

What you have written here is an answer to you asking yourself the question "Why should I buy Civ4?". But that is not the question of the thread. It seems to me that as the thread started, the least you could do is actually give an answer to the question you yourself posed.

[Peter Triggs]

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

Originally posted by M. le Comte


To my mind,

Pandaemonium (Panda is his nickname)

works for Activision...

Alpha Centauri was published by Electronic Arts, not Activision.

[Harovan]

Yep, Activision were the knaves who published CtP2.