Would this game be better if the graphics were worse?

[MirageAg99]

If WOW can make a beautiful game that doesn't need a top of the line graphics card (I can play it on my desktop at home that has an integrated cheapo video card) why can't Friaxis do the same?

[kimmygibler]

What about the fact that even if you can play the game you are limited from playing huge maps, even with good systems. Imagine if there were an option to simply have the graphics from ToT and the engine from this game. How could anyone not be in favour of such an option?

It is totally needless what they did for Civ4. It is a very sad testament of video games in general. I have no problems running the game on my system because I have a new system. But if the game could run even faster imagine how great it would be. Like if there were no split second delay after clicking on things and it ran as responsively as Windows or something like that. But I guess everyone assumes that people will only buy a game if it looks new. So make it look like a RTS game and make the system requirements even higher than any RTS game...

Civ2 became legendary partly because every could play it, even on old systems.

[Lucilla]

The new graphics are beautiful and it's nice to see the different buildings when you zoom in, but IMO this eye candy doesn't weigh up the disadvantages:

- some people can't play without upgrading their PC. Sticking to the Civ3 graphics is beautyful enough for me

- some graphics are not easily distinguishable, you really need to zoom in, go to the city screen or turn on additional help with the 'display resources' button. Maybe some mods could improve that in the future? (Thinking of the different terrain mods e.g. made by Snoopy for Civ3)
Currently the screen is sort of overloaded and it is difficult to see all the information you need at a glance.

- movements by using the number pad are much slower than in Civ3, because I can't turn off the animation.

I don't know how far this is possible, but it would be nice if you could turn off some of features (animations, 3D, shading) for people with not so advanced video cards and/or for faster gameplay.

To sum it up: I would not say the game would be better if the graphics were worse, but it would be better if the user could choose which eye candy to use. I would have bought the game also with lesser graphics and would not complain that the look & feel were outdated.

[XF Clohvn]

I vote no. We all want CIV to be a success, and without modern graphics it just wont sell to the gerneral public. Besides, the game really isn't that graphic intensive. It runs fine with cards years old (like my 9800 Pro). CPU intensive yes, but not graphics intense. And I also disagree with people claiming it's cluttered and hard to see things. There are many built in functions that allow you to easily see where things are (Ctrl-R for resources for example), which I leave on most of the time and have no problems. There's no sense in crippling a game for those who have old machines. Now for those having issues with modern machines I do sympathize, but that's a different issue.

[Zinegata]

Being someone with the bare minimum specs "required" to play the game, I would have preferred a lower-spec game ^_^. I'm afraid I might not be able to run the game without upgrades.

I must say though, that improved graphics technology does not mean you'll end up with a better looking game. To a large extent, how good the game looks depends on its art team. Moreover, from most accounts it's not the graphics that is causing any performance problems - it's the sheer amount of memory being eaten by the game to track everything that's happening in it.

I do think they could have done a better job optimizing the game though... Just look at how optimized the system specs for Guild Wars are =).

[saebasan]

I voted Yes.

I play Civ for the game play, not the graphics. The fact that it can't be played on a laptop with a video card that was high-end one year ago is rediculous.

[LDiCesare]

I voted Yes.

The fact that a huge chunk of potential customers fall below the minimum specs is "collateral damage", but of course a lot of that group will upgrade in the next six months anyways.

Actually, my comp is below-spec. I can run the game despite having black terrain (unless I uncover the map, and this comes naturally as time passes by).
My main gripe is not so much that the game should run on all computers, it is that I cannot mod the graphics in civ4 (or 3, or CtP2 for that matter) as easily as I could in civ2.
I'd also like the game to be able to run in degraded mode. For instance the basic NetHack user interface is like this:
[pre]
-----
|.@.|
|...+
-----
[/pre]
But the same game allows 2D-tiles and even 2D-iso (Falcons Eye). Why can't commercial games provide a simple 2D-tiled alternative user interface for low spec computers when the game is not about graphics? (I know, it costs money - maybe designing an open 2D platform with some api would help, but is there a real market for this?)

[kimmygibler]

That would be great if there was option to have nethack style "graphics" in civ4. Just imagine how much of the game would be opened up to so many people. Tons of people already play nethack and that game or versions of it is like 20 years old. How long would it really take to add such an option? I know it wouldn't be simple but imagine, you could play huge terra maps and even bigeger without all the slowdown

[Godzilla]

As far as games go, I don't want to play something that doesn't grab me visually...

I'm not too big on "going back" to play games that I loved back then, because I'll get bored by the visuals.

Gameplay is huge for me as well, because if the game is boring but looks pretty, then it's a wallpaper.

If it plays well, but looks like garbage, it's a book.

Both have their place, but unless it has both, it's on a shelf.

[TheArsenal]

I’m the tie breaker … for now.
Better game? I don’t think so. I don’t need better graphics, but as much time as I spend staring at that game, it’s nice to have.

[evizaer]

Hmm. This is more like what my "3d civ" thread should have been. Instead, it turned into a *****fest.

I'd prefer CIV to use 2d graphics, elegantly done. I'd be able to run the game flawlessly, then.

[MxM]

Good gameplay with good graphics > good gameplay with average graphics. It is that simple.

They also do provided options to allow players with slower computer to play. If you have very slow computer, then either upgrade, or play on tiny world.