Third XP: Yay or Nay?

[Zinegata]

I don't mind another expansion if these two conditions are met:

1) No more gameplay changes for the "regular" patches. Patches that improve performance (i.e. close memory leaks, improved interface, etc) are fine. Patches that change gameplay tend to confuse and annoy me, and adding a whole new expansion to the mix will just further confuse me and end up annoying me.

2) It adds compelling content. Warlords wasn't really too exciting save for some extra war options. I like the *ideas* pitched by BTS - such as corporations and espionage - but frankly I was more excited by the scenarios, especially the one where weather was such an important factor in the game (The Age of Ice). Another "meh" expansion (nice but not great) just isn't gonna cut it.

[Wiglaf]

How often do we have to say it? SMAC's rights belong to EA, Firaxis can't make a SMAC2. (Yes, hypothetically EA might buy up Take-Two but that (a) is *etremely* hypthetical and (b) assumes EA would rather see a SMAC2 than more Civ content which considering their recent use of the SMAC license doesn't seem terribly likely; either way, companies generally don't start projects based on hypothetical assumptions and you can rest assured that Firaxis's next projects are already well into the planning stages, whatever they might be).

Er, EA could just contract with firaxis to make SMAC2. EA publishes, Firaxis develops.

Just like they contracted with Tilted Mill to make Simcity Societies.

[Jaybe]

EA could contract with Firaxis, which is a part of one of EA's competitors, TakeTwo??

[Wiglaf]

They could license away the rights to the SMAC name, sure. If Firaxis is willing to pay the license fee and develop the game, EA would probably be all for it, since they don't seem to have any use for SMAC.

[Alexander I]

I'd buy just about anything in the Civ franchise for PC, provided it lived up to the legacy of the series.

[wodan11]

Originally posted by Zinegata
I don't mind another expansion if these two conditions are met:

1) No more gameplay changes for the "regular" patches. Patches that improve performance (i.e. close memory leaks, improved interface, etc) are fine. Patches that change gameplay tend to confuse and annoy me, and adding a whole new expansion to the mix will just further confuse me and end up annoying me.

So.... you'd rather that gameplay be left broken?

Wodan

[Wittlich]

I would say that BtS is the last installment for CivIV.

Next up: CivV

[Will9]

Originally posted by Wittlich
I would say that BtS is the last installment for CivIV.

Next up: CivV

CivR

[Wittlich]

Awww, Willy - There is always the hope for a new!

[Will9]

Originally posted by Wittlich
Awww, Willy

I have to request that that never be spoken or typed again

[Wittlich]

Originally posted by Will9


I have to request that that never be spoken or typed again

If masculinety identity is an issue, or if there are other issues; then I would suggest that you change your handle from "Will9" - since what I called you would be the first nickname they will call you by.

And just because I've suddenly got the feeling:



Sorry Will9 - to easy of a bait - whoever you are.

[Robert]

civ4 was a succes, as far as I can see.
Both commercially as 'technically'.
I don't see why they wouldn't create a civ5.