Do we really need an Xpack?

[Zoid]

I mean, really? Civ4 is pretty complete as it is. Why fix something that´s only marginally broken? And if it doesn´t need fixing at all, what´s the attraction of another gazillion useless civs with random traits? With the SDK everyone can mod in their own favourite Civ, no matter how insignificant. "Oh, yes I´d like to play as the Welsh or Aborigine. I would also like to have a gazillion scenarios here that I can download free of fan sites. And I´d would like to pay $30 for it!"

Yes/No/Banana?

[Son of David]

Yeah and I cannot wait for it to come out.

We NEED Lenin as a third leader for Russia, BTW. That would be so seriously cool I'd wet my pants.

[Solver]

Really, why not?

The fact that Civ4 is great out of the box means just that it's a great game. And the expansion isn't about fixing, that's what patches are about. Expansion is a larger scale thing, it adds more stuff, fixes maybe bigger issues, introduces new concepts, something like that.

Everyone could mod in their favorite civ since day 1 anyway, yes. And with the SDK of course people are free to create their own mods, as in-depth as they want, full with new concepts, a better AI, etc. The problem is, it takes time and coordinated effort. Which is what companies have.

Suppose that the expansion has several new civs, a few scenarios, a new/enhanced gameplay feature or two and some AI improvements. Could the modders do that? Absolutely. Would it be done all together as one cohesive project in a relatively short timespan? No. But Firaxis can do it.

[Zoid]

I just think it´s a waste of time and money. OTOH if this gives more money towards a possible SMAC2 project. Be my guest!

[LordShiva]

SMAC, SMAC2

More scenarios, civs, mods, etc.

[Son of David]

Yeah I mean the original SMAC was bad enough.

[Ninot]

I voted no. I think the game is very complete right now and doesnt need it really. But I wouldn't be upset to see it

[Xuenay]

Originally posted by Solver
Suppose that the expansion has several new civs, a few scenarios, a new/enhanced gameplay feature or two and some AI improvements. Could the modders do that? Absolutely. Would it be done all together as one cohesive project in a relatively short timespan? No. But Firaxis can do it.

Considering how far along the Fall from Heaven mod already is, I'd say it'll probably reach that point before Firaxis even *starts* work on their expansion pack.

An XP seems pretty unnecessary to me.

[Urban Ranger]

How many people have heard of the "Fall from Heaven" mod? Not me, and I visit the forums frequently.

The expansion pack can simply be a bunch of mods gathered from the Net - with permission, of course - polished and made to work together, plus some new civs, some other stuff, maybe even a Civ I skin .

[Rook]

My vote is yes, but what I'd like to see is gameplay added features. More civs/leaders and scenarios aren't what I am into. I'd love to see about 20 new techs added and more years added to the end game. More units is always good too, and if they were to do some game play changes like what is often talked about here in the forum, then they'ed definately get my money.

I never bought Civ3 Play the World cause at the time, I had enough Civilization and from what I read it didn't seem to add much to the game.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yes... you can always add more.

[ike7]

I would like an xpac if only it makes the civs more like their historical namesakes. I'd like to see more civ specific units & specific buildings.

Right now, i feel like you might as well start the game by choosing your two traits; the actual historical namesake of the civ seems irrelevant to how you play them.

[DirtyMartini]

I like more civs, leaders etc.

The problem I see is that if they add more leader/civs, they'll have to lose the one unique trait combo per leader. Either that, or add additional traits, in which case they'll more than likely have to reassign traits, as they did with CIV3.

I guess of those two options, I'd rather more traits get added and then the traits get reassigned. It would be silly to have to different leaders with identical traits.

Dirty

[Dis]

Yes. I think this game still has lots of problems. Many units are missing. Some just don't work right. And of course we need more civs and features. The modern age just doesn't flow right time wise. It needs fixing.

hmm, it really looks like I'm slamming the game. It's a great game, but it surely isn't perfect.

[Willem]

Re: Do we really need an Xpack?

Originally posted by Zoid
Civ4 is pretty complete as it is.

There's always room for improvement. For one thing, I'd like to see a Religious victory condition, and having religions adopt certain traits. There's also room for more units, like a Siege unit between Catapults and Cannon. And alot of people would like to see Cruise missiles later in the game, as well as nuclear submarines.

And I'd certainly like to see more civs in the game, it's getting a bit predictable seeing Montezuma in game after game. A few more traits and leaders would be nice as well. Plus Civ 3 had alot of terrain improvements that would be nice to have in this version like Outposts, Radar Towers and Airfields.

There's still lots of opportunites to add new elements to this game. Even though it might feel complete at the moment, after an XP or two you'll be wondering how you could have been satisfied just playing the original version. Sure the community can do alot, but can they do it well? Quite often when I try some fan created addition to a game, it doesn't come across as polished or balanced. I'd prefer to play with something that was done professionally with a careful eye as to how it fits in with the rest of the game.