Slould Civ V be less graphics intensive?

[Lancer]

I'm bummed cuz I can't run Cviv IV in the US, my comp here isn't a powerful one. So lets see what people think.

[LDiCesare]

I can't say I care about the graphics. I believe it's totally unrealistic to believe less demanding graphics would be provided. So the question really sounds rhetorical.
Civ2 graphics presented the huge advantage to be easy to mod, and they sure did the job.
Civ IV has some nice features like being able to draw lines on the map and such, that a simpler graphics engine wouldn't allow.
Another thing is that new players won't be attracted by civ2 like graphics, and reviews would blast the game for that.

[Andemagne]

LdiCesare: you have some good points, all of them actually. but what else pushes min. sys. regs. up more than graphics?

[Locutus]

The complaints about Civ4's min requirements are grossly exaggerated: I have a PC from early 2002 and it can run Civ4 comfortably. A PC from 1991 couldn't run Civ2 either, why would you expect a PC from earlier than 2001 to be able to run Civ4? The only real requirement for Civ4 besides a not completely antiquated PC, is to have non-integrated graphics -- ANY non-integrated graphics. My graphics card broke down a few months ago and since I plan on replacing this PC within the next year anyway I just bought just about the cheapest graphics card I could find to replace it for the time being (a Geforce 6200 for less than €30), and Civ4 is looking better than ever and plays smooth as a baby's skin, with all graphics settings maxed out (and when the game first came out I used to play it on a GeForce 440 MX, not with everything maxed out but it looked and played well enough). The only people I know of that are having real problems with Civ4 are people with integrated graphics (or even more ancient PCs than mine), but you bring that onto yourself: integrated graphics are just NOT suitable for gaming AT ALL, that's widely known -- they can barely play full-screen hi-res (not even hi-def) video. You just can't rely on integrated graphics if you plan to do anything video-related with your system...

Since Civ5 won't get released until late 2009 at the earliest, I certainly wouldn't expect it to run on a PC from 1995 -- that'd be insane. If you want that, stick to games from 1995... I don't think the requirements need to be significantly higher than Civ4, but they certainly shouldn't have to be lower. If any 4-year-old PC (by the time Civ5 is released) with non-integrated graphics can play Civ5, I'll be very, very pleased about Firaxis's continuing dedication to support low-end systems

[Krill]

[q=Locutus] My graphics card broke down a few months ago and since I plan on replacing this PC within the next year anyway I just bought just about the cheapest graphics card I could find to replace it for the time being (a Geforce 6200 for less than €30)[/q]

BS. I still have a PC with a 6200 in it, with 1 GB DDR Ram and an Athlon 2400+. CIV ran like **** on anything over a large map in the late game.

[Lambiorix_be]

I want still better graphics for CIV5. It is for me a vital part of the game.

[LDiCesare]

what else pushes min. sys. regs. up more than graphics?

Nothing pushes more than graphics. Graphics requires a graphcis card, which is dedicated. The problem with 3d software is you need a good graphics card. A good computer doesn't really matter.

Now, ai, particularly if it's to be good or if it's naively coded, requires some processing power. Priority is rarely set on the ai however, and games that do put a priority there will tend to be careful not to be too demanding as it'd slow down the game too much.

We should note that, while some old games like Ancient Domains Of Mystery could be developped by a single guy using zero graphics, nowadays most games are produced with more graphic artists than developpers.
I personally find it sad, but some people need the great graphics to just look at a game.

[Imran Siddiqui]

No, more intensive. I want more detail!

Upgrade your damned computers every once in a while .

And Locutus is right... it isn't that intensive, especially compared to other games coming out during the time.

[bantams]

well if and when civ5 is released im sure the graphics will look something like civ rev and therefore the min specs on the box will be higher than the min specs which are complete b/s for civ4

I just hope they test the multiplayer part before releasing any future civ games but i doubt it!

[Targonis]

Why is it that some people want the entire computer industry to grind to a halt just because they can't handle spending $500 every four years? Seriously, if in 2009 you don't have a computer built in 2004 or 2005, then maybe you shouldn't be trying to play NEW games.

So, accept it and upgrade from time to time, but don't expect the rest of the world to wait for YOU to catch up. It is one thing to not require the latest and greatest at the time of release, it is another to not require something that isn't considered ancient either.

[Zealot]

In January 2008 I bought my new machine, which is a nice one, minus a graphics card that I couldn'd afford at the time. Fortunately, I could still play Civ 4 BtS with its Intel G31/G33 graphics chipset. That was until I had the brilliant idea to update the graphics' drivers a get Civ with corrupted graphics!
Anyway, now that I bought a decent graphics card (ATI 4670) I actually feel sad that I don't get any extra eye candy or detail or anything. Yes, we in the Civ community not always have the funding for a more modern machine than FPSs communities, but we still upgrade, and we also play other games, and I would like Firaxis to evolve a bit on that as well. Give us better graphics, give us more game detail.

For example, when Far Cry 1 came out with its 64-bit patch for Win XP 64, your graphics would improve in the field of vision depth. I think that was one kickass improvement!

[faded glory]

A simple option to tone down graphics for all systems. Similiar to the total war series.

[-Jrabbit]

Originally posted by faded glory
A simple option to tone down graphics for all systems. Similiar to the total war series.

[Harold6913]

I like the Civ III graphics best.

[monolith94]

I think that resolution should be less of a focus of the graphics designers than simple art-quality. For example, things should look appealing and friendly; easy on the eye. In this respect, civ 4 was a massive leap forward over civ 3, which looked like monkey-puke to me.