Will we see a backlash on Civ4 like we did when Civ3 was released?

[jened]

yes - video card related and lack of cities.

[yin26]

Originally posted by Sabre2th

The AI in Civ was always meant to be scalable in some sense. Who is to say that Firaxis hasn't made a powerful AI? Solver already says that it handles things pretty well. You can't expect him to commit to anything about the AI this early

Sheesh...even when you're trying to be positive, you're negative

LOL. Well, I'm just going off of Solver's remarks that the AI didn't exactly shock him. However, he did mention a few things (like units pillaging better while waiting for reinforcements) that sound quite promising.

[Atahualpa]

Originally posted by yin26
For me, developer effort goes a long way. It's obvious to me that Firaxis took the sting from Civ 3 and decided to prove they are a force to contend with in strategy gaming. Now, for my money, they still tend to focus a bit too much on the warm fuzzy gaming experience, but as my poll even at Poly shows: A huge number of gamers don't really want killer AI. They want moderate challenges and lots of atmosphere. Civ 4 seems ready to deliver this.

I don't play a game to lose against the AI. Computer players are just there to make sure I have a good win and give some training for MP games.
There is simply no fun in losing against the AI. However it can be fun losing against a human.

Seeking challenges is what multiplayer is for and with Civ4, finally it seems they put a good amounf of work into it. At least I hope so.

[Wrong_shui]

I reckon people will complain. Just how things work.

[Volstag]

There will be some backlash -- it happens with every game. On the one hand, you'll have folks who think the antecedents were better, on the other you'll have folks who've spent the past months fostering wildly unrealistic expectations -- the real game isn't as good as the game they've been playing in their head.

[MrFun]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov


I hope, we, as hardcore fans have matured a bit.

funniest post in here

[Mace]

It would be great for Civ4 to bring back that same "intangible wonderment" that I experienced with Civ1.

I can't explain what it was about Civ1 that made it so much fun...maybe it was only my youth. I know it's not nostalgia though...it's something else...

[hexagonian]

Originally posted by Mace
I can't explain what it was about Civ1 that made it so much fun...maybe it was only my youth. I know it's not nostalgia though...it's something else...

Too many gaming options now...and you probably have played the 'build a civilization from scratch' scenario so many times since civ1 that it has lost a little lustre.

The bar has been raised on the WOW factor too...

[Lul Thyme]

Originally posted by Verenti
I know my biggest Qualm with Civ3, didn't survive over to Civ4. Maybe it did.

It was how one Spearman of the computer could wipe out about a dozen archers of yours, Inversely One archer could anhilate your garrisons of Spearmen. This was on the lowest Difficulty level. (I don't play the higher levels)


The AI shouldn't get bonuses to things like "Combat" on the lower levels. If anything on the lowest level, I should modifiers to my combat values.

You must have loved the game if you main gripe was an imaginary one.
The AI never got any combat bonus or penalty at any level in any version of Civ.
Do a statistical test with the same situation inversed between you and AI if you don't trust me.

EDIT: just noticed the point has already been made, so I'll expand.

I think there are two ways to explain your feeling.
The AI gets many other bonuses so you probably were in tougher and tighter fights, so each of your loss counted for more in your mind compared to a war where you were wiping the floor where the same situation wouldn't have botherd you as much.

The human mind is VERY prone to looking for patterns where there are none. I dont know which civ game's pseudo-RNG was accused of having too many streaks as opposed to a true RNG and many ppl swore by that.

All statistical tests pointed to the contrary.
Point being, the human mind finds pattern everywhere, even if there is none, so you have to be careful to have numerical data to make these kinds of points.

[LDiCesare]

People will complain for the sake of it. I think the graphics may be the main point of discontent too. Requirements, speed of the game, and, for some, looks (like - what are those three giants towering over the Pyramids - archers???).
If, like in civ3, the late-game hasn't been playtested well, then it will be tedious and unbalanced and there will be discontent. People will also moan over religion all over the place. But the game looks more promising than civ3 did.

[Freddz]

Originally posted by DaShi
Some of the people who complained about Civ3 never even played the game!

Before I actually played the game, I looked at the info on it and was anything but impressed. It just seemed so flat. So I didn't buy it... I thought... and as time wen't on I had a bad day and bought it.
It was everything I expected from the start: Yes, flat and uninspired.
I wish I hadn't bought it.
So criticism based on earlier Civ-experience together with info that the company and sites display CAN actually count for something, and pretty much. A gamer can see when an effort has been made to take a step, or not.

But I think the race with Activision to produce the game as quickly as possible also was a culprit in the not so grand effort by Firaxis in the making of Civ 3.

[snoopy369]

I think there will be LESS backlash, if any at all.

Civ3 doesn't really have the devoted fans Civ2 and SMAC have ... and civ4 is essentially going back in many ways to Civ2/SMAC. Spies, civics, etc. ... in a lot of ways it's going to draw in the civ2/SMAC fans. That will reduce the backlash it gets vs Civ3, which changed a lot of things people liked from civ2, and didn't incorporate much from SMAC ...

[Gibsie]

I think we'll see complaints about hammers replacing shields, and, if anyone plays that long, mandatory joiningness of the UN.

[alva]

The human mind is VERY prone to looking for patterns where there are none. I dont know which civ game's pseudo-RNG was accused of having too many streaks as opposed to a true RNG and many ppl swore by that.

Absolutely!
What's more and probably worse is that they more often remember the bad and not the good.
I've seen many posts and treads about that {[{&""'##é AI super tank unit being able to fend off your invasion army, however I've never seen one where your tank unit defeated a whole AI army which happens just as often.

Just as the bus going the other way or somewhere you don't need to be, always comes before the one you want.

It would be great for Civ4 to bring back that same "intangible wonderment" that I experienced with Civ1.

I can't explain what it was about Civ1 that made it so much fun...maybe it was only my youth. I know it's not nostalgia though...it's something else...

Just as with your first kiss..you will have many more and many will be better, it will never again be your first...
Yes you may change kiss with that other thing.

I've said it before, while whomever comes up with a medicine to cure Alzheimer, the one who comes up with a pill that can erase memory that you can choose, will be ten times as rich.

[Mace]

Originally posted by alva
I've said it before, while whomever comes up with a medicine to cure Alzheimer, the one who comes up with a pill that can erase memory that you can choose, will be ten times as rich.

Aah you scare me...the very thought of erasing the memory of my first time playing Civ....!

I remember, it was about February 1992. Or was it March? I stayed up all night playing Civ1. The birds started chirping, and awoke me from my Civ Trance, and I knew then that it was dawn...and that I was hooked

And yes, I have been in CivAnon for, uh, 13 years now.