Funny game play fix in patch

[seebs]

According to Firaxis:

MANY game play improvements (ex Animal Husbandry reveals horses)

Imagine that.

"So, you know I've been trying to figure out where hamsters come from. And I pretty much figured it out."

"Yeah. I guess you said they make more hamsters. When a mommy and daddy hamster love each other very much."

"Yeah. But it turns out to have a practical implication, y'know?"

"What's that?"

"Well, you know the invisible thunder? And the thing where people would fly through the air with these round marks on them, and our grain would disappear as though something were eating it?"

"Yeah?"

"Well, there's animals that do that, and now that I know how hamsters reproduce, I can see them!"

[Jerh9e1k5]

lol
Well there is a difference between the real world and the gaming world. This is simply a feature that makes it more enjoyable.

The sudden appearance of horses could signify the people learning which areas have dense populations of horses. It doesn't necessarily mean they had no knowledge of horses before then.

[Cambo67]

Or someone figured out how to catch one of the blighters.

And then think of actually sitting on it.

Bit mad, when you think about it.... ;-)



Cambo

[notyoueither]

[seebs]

Oh, I know it's an abstraction. I just think it's funny that you can't even percieve them until you have the resources to tame them.

[notyoueither]

Of course you are right, but your OP is funny.

It reminds me of battle cows.

Cheers

[GodSpawn]

The "Horse" resource is supposed to represent your Civ's ability to use horses, not just recognise them.

Since "Animal Husbandry" involves breeding, rearing, raising and breaking horses, it makes complete sense that it should be a pre-requisite to the "Horse" resource.

The same thing applies to many things - for example, coal is present in outcroppings and washed up on beaches, oil bubbles out of the ground. People will observe these things before having the requisite tech to use them. Horses are the same.

[Timmer]

Originally posted by Cambo67
Or someone figured out how to catch one of the blighters.

And then think of actually sitting on it.

Bit mad, when you think about it.... ;-)



Cambo

In the same vein, think about clams.

Somebody had the thought of actually opening
up one of those things and then eating it.

A braver, or more hungry, man than most...

And, not in CIV, oysters. "Here's a nice piece of
snot in a shell, I think I'll eat it !"

[Gunter]

Originally posted by seebs
Oh, I know it's an abstraction. I just think it's funny that you can't even percieve them until you have the resources to tame them.

We are almost tending to phlosophy here

cheers

Gunter

[Unspeakable Horror]

Originally posted by Timmer


In the same vein, think about clams.

Somebody had the thought of actually opening
up one of those things and then eating it.

A braver, or more hungry, man than most...

And, not in CIV, oysters. "Here's a nice piece of
snot in a shell, I think I'll eat it !"

[wilebill2]

I suppose that when a Civ "learns" a technology, it becomes a part of its primary infrastructure.

Riding horses, for instance, probably goes back much further than the official dates in history books. Anthropologists have discovered Neanderthal skeletons with injuries that suggest they were thrown from some animal they were riding. And the legends of Centaurs who were both the teachers of early civilizations and their drunken oppressors, depending on the legend cycle, suggests an early mastery of horse riding now lost to us in the mists of time.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Timmer


In the same vein, think about clams.

Somebody had the thought of actually opening
up one of those things and then eating it.

A braver, or more hungry, man than most...

And, not in CIV, oysters. "Here's a nice piece of
snot in a shell, I think I'll eat it !"

I've often wondered about that guy. Was he drunk as hell? Starving? Just plain nuts?

-Arrian

[Hastlek]

Originally posted by Arrian




I've often wondered about that guy. Was he drunk as hell? Starving? Just plain nuts?

-Arrian

Gotta figure he watched birds smash and eat them. If it's good for seagulls, it must be good for us, right? Anyway, thank god for him... not sure I could live without a bowl of clam chowder every once in a while.

-H

[Fried-Psitalon]

I find it amusing that people insist horses should be visible because you can see them. Imagine if every animal in the world was on the screen. You'd be overrun with gophers, squirrels, dogs, cats, fruit bats, blue jays....

The reason that horses aren't visible before animal husbandry is because they're just another random animal - in this case, one you can't even catch - that isn't worth noting. It's only after animal husbandry that someone figures out these are noteworthy.

[yin26]

At the end of the day, it's a gameplay decision. The rest is a slippery slope. What about silk, for example? Really those shouldn't show up on the map, either, if the idea is "nothing shows up until people know its use."

But that isn't the argument. Things show up or don't for gameplay reasons. If you hid silk, for instance, you'd at some point take away the gamer's ability to make good decions about what parts of the tech tree to focus on. At some point, you'd be playing tech roulette.