Does Anyone Else Prefer Civ 3's Graphics Too?

[Nikolai]

Let's see, when was Warcraft 3 released? Oh yeah, 2002. And when was Civ4 released? Oh yeah, 2005.

[Randolph]

Originally posted by Gibsie
Civ 4's graphics are at least 12% better, and only a 600% greater burden on our computers' resources! Well done to all involved

My thoughts exactly, except that it should also be noted that Civ4's graphics make it 50% harder to determine exactly what is on a square (unit type, resource, etc). You therefore have to play significantly more “zoomed in.” meaning that you have to scroll more and have a harder time getting the “big picture.” I adore Civ4, but I would really like an option to use more pragmatic and less artistic graphics.

[padillah]

I will admit, finding my borders is sometimes an act of sheer willpower.

Whomever decided that light peach on beige and light tan was discrenable needs to be sent to art school.

Tom P.

EDIT: And who made the Celts peach? I mean... peach? Really?

[Dis]

I find borders easier to find than in civ3. Though I usually play the same nation (germany). I keep meaning to play the others, I just never get around to it.

peach.

[Jerh9e1k5]

Originally posted by alms66
Yea, that'll handle civ4 alright. I'm just one of those people who prefers a beautifully crafted piece of artwork over the crap that is 3d graphics in computer games. I still have yet to see a 3d game that actually looks good while playing it. Too many sharp edges, due to low pollygon counts just makes it ugly as hell, IMHO. Texture-wise, yes Civ4 is fine, if not possibly even good, but I don't like 3d graphics.

This is exactly how I feel. I even prefer the graphics from command and conquer red alert to the graphics of red alert 2 and tiberian sun. 3D graphics only look good on shooter games.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by padillah
I will admit, finding my borders is sometimes an act of sheer willpower.

Whomever decided that light peach on beige and light tan was discrenable needs to be sent to art school.

Tom P.

I sometimes have trouble with this too.

[Generaldoktor]

Originally posted by dearmad
No. No. And no. I was just admiring the Horse archer units I had on the map awhile ago... and thinking... I love how much personality they have, unlike in CIV III. I also like the diplomacy graphics MUCH more. I can actually stomach to look at them, and a few of them (Hapsh, of Egypt) actually make me smile once in awhile. I even forgive Isabelle her ways because she's personable when we're face to face...

NO CIV III gfx for me ever again!

Isabella looks very much like a cartooned animation of an old girlfriend of mine. That can be good and bad. Last game I killed her off though. ."I used to love her, but I had to kill her...," Axl Rose.

This thread has had an amazing response in just a couple days. I agree with the thread author, C3 was easier on the eyes, which is an issue if you play for 12 hours at a time. I agree with Gibsie, C4 takes way too much PC resources. I realize I am in the minority on this.

I didn't get to see all the C3 mods, not being on Apolyton at the time, but did get Thamis' "Ancient Med" mod and thought that had beautiful terrain. I have the Blue Marble for C4 these last few months, but feel that while it is an improvement, I liked C3's better and CTP better than either

[alms66]

Originally posted by Generaldoktor
I have the Blue Marble for C4 these last few months, but feel that while it is an improvement, I liked C3's better and CTP better than either

CtP, really? I thought the tiles themselves looked good, but the transitions were horrible, which ruined the whole package. Civ3's transitions were much more natural and realistic looking, though I didn't like the fact that they resorted to those massive tilesets to achieve it. IMO, it could have been done just as easily with a more traditional tileset, like that seen in civ2. CtP-like tiles with Civ3 like transitions - now that would be civ-heaven (graphicswise at least).

[Gibsie]

Originally posted by Nikolai
Let's see, when was Warcraft 3 released? Oh yeah, 2002. And when was Civ4 released? Oh yeah, 2005.

Wow, you truly are the master of point-missing. I realise you were being somewhat flippant, but play Warcraft 3 with all the graphical settings up highest, dozens of units on-screen all at once, and then play Civ 4, with but a few different graphics displayed on screen at once, on their lowest possible setting. Now be amazed at how Warcraft 3's graphics are so much prettier (Even though they're a few years older! You'll also be amazed to find that Starcraft: Brood War's opening sequence is better than Warlords, even though it's even older!), the game is doing so much more, AND how old systems can run it.

The fact that another game that is 4 years old looks and runs better is not a good thing in my mind, to be honest...

[Tennyson]

When I first ran Civ4, and I was not accustomed to the new graphics such that it was not obvious when a jungle had sugar, or to distinguish pigs from cows from sheep, or spot fish in the sea, I was wishing for the more simplified iconic graphics of Civ3.

Now I'd say it's a toss-up. I definately prefer the diplomacy graphics but the terrain graphics I can take or leave.

[vilemerchant]

Would anyone agree that the civ3 graphics were at the least more functional? Sometimes in civ4 i find certain things happening like,,

- losing a city because I didn't see a galleon unload a heap of macemen since the game 'camera' was panning about all over the place.

- I'm chasing an enemy transport at sea with my destroyer. Enemy's turn - woah! which way into the fog off war did it go? I didn't see it move because the camera was panning about as it moved (again).

Things like this would never happen on civ 3, every move on the screen was always (painfully) obvious. I just think it's a bit harder to see what just went on during the AIs turn.

[Will9]

I posted about that in the nitpik thread. All that needs to be done for the first one is just move the time of the enemy units warning to when you arn't looking at something else, and it still hasn't been done!

[alms66]

There's an easier solution to that, IMO, simply highlight the unit in red, much like your unit is highlighted in blue for promotions, and put red dots on the minimap...
it then becomes very easy to find and kill all enemies.

[Generaldoktor]

Red dots and highlights are awfully busy graphics and would probably get a downthumb from some snob reviewer. They also will consume memory and power and C4 does plenty of that anyway. But I like the idea.

Camera pans. Didn't Civ3 do that too, at the beginning of the turn, for enemies in sight? I do suspect C4 is worse, for agitation and not returning to places of key action, but I've just started making it a memory game with those and going back to them myself, regardless of whether I remember anything there or not. Whatelseyagonnado?

[padillah]

Why not just make camera speed a parameter that is user controlled?

Then we could make it as slow or as fast as we want rather than just "on/off".

Oh, and "pause time" we may want the camera to whip from one place to the next but the camera pause for a while once it gets there. So, both should be parameters.

Tom P.