Civilazation type games are dying.

[Chris 62]

I don't think turn based stategy games are dead. The reason board games from companies like avalon hill went the way of the dinosaur was there limitations, not design flaws. It's a sure bet civ2 will fade, just as civ1 did(Now be honest, do you ever play anymore?). The hope for civ3 will be more and better: More civs to work with; more techs to research; more wonders to build; more slots for scenario designers ect. Ask yourself this: are you still using the same pc that you had five or ten years ago? Or did you upgrade it, or replace it completely? If people become grognards who refuse change(As many board wargamers were,I know,I was one of them) then tbs and civilization will die and that's a fact. But I doubt that will happen, because of the very nature of the game we play. You get rewarded in the game, and cannot finish it, if you don't move foward and advance(Just like real life). As always sales will determin what gets made and how. That's just the way I see it.

[Wiglaf]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>That is correct AH... think about games like Risk or Diplomacy... ageless classics that are still being played on college campuses by a new generation.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Risk/Diplomacy aren't really computer games (although people tried - yuck ).

[Lancer]

I thought the board wargaming explosion of the '70s would last forever, and if anyone back then had suggested that it would be near dead within 20 years, well they would get replys such as the ones to this thread I'd imagine. Like those who still play those great old classic games upon which armies of cardboard pieces snake across a map, we might one day, 20 years from now, be playing Civ 2 or three for the millionth time, and wondering where it all went wrong.

I think D&D 'did in' wargaming, combined with other factors. I watched many gamers get drawn away from wargaming groups to become involved w/ D&D, never to return. Those groups dwindled and disappeared, taking wargaming down with them.

Now I see endless monster shooter games dominate the comp game mags. Page after page of different games, each with some silly monster drawing with cryptic words about how powerful it is...and I think D&D, and extrapolate the demise of turn based strategy computer games.

I have a copy of War in Europe, a huge game made by S&T in the '70s that a fellow named UncleRoggy, who used to visit here, sent me last year as a gift. I have a few other good old wargames to mess around with also. Now I have a few computer games I really like too. Civ and Civ 2, some others, and if the quite contemplation of turn based builders gives way to pimply faced kids blasting monsters, so be it. I still have what I have, and am content.

If however more turn based comes along...WOOHOO!
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by Lancer (edited January 23, 2001).]</font>

[Sprayber]

I am anticipating the release of Europa Universalis here in the United States. And yes it is real time, but I don't think that will cause it to be bad. Give it a fair try and you might be pleasently surprised. And I don't think Apolyton will go away. If I am not mistaked this is a place for more of the die hard fans than just the casual player. I came here because of SMAC.

[Alexander's Horse]

Lancer, keep the faith man, I still have my board games


------------------
Chaos, panic and disorder - My work here is done.

[SilverDragon]

Look at it this way. Civ1 was a phenomenally popular game, civ2 was a phenomenally popular game, so by all logic, civ3 should be a phenomenally popular game. When mps tried to make ctp different, many people hated it and went back to civ. So mps should just continue making civ the way it is. BURN SS AT STAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

------------------
- SilverDragon, scourge of the western skies

Email me at
SilverDragon141@aol.com

[Chris 62]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by SilverDragon on 01-24-2001 01:39 PM</font>
Look at it this way. Civ1 was a phenomenally popular game, civ2 was a phenomenally popular game, so by all logic, civ3 should be a phenomenally popular game. When mps tried to make ctp different, many people hated it and went back to civ. So mps should just continue making civ the way it is. BURN SS AT STAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

What he said!
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by cpoulos (edited January 24, 2001).]</font>

[Shadowstrike]

*gets tied to a stake*

Hey! What did I do?

[Imran Siddiqui]

Admit it! You wanted to get tied to that stake, you sicko!

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>SMAC was a horrid game sales-wise.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Smoking some good stuff? SMAC was a GREAT game for Firaxis. They made loads on it! It was the 4th (IIRC) Highest Selling game of 1999...

[b]call me retarded[/q]

OK! You're retarded .

--

Civ3 will take the gaming world by storm. All those magazines with those FPSs will have Civ3 on the cover. Don't believe me? Look what happened with Civ2. You can't say in 1996, Turn Based was the rage? The biggest game was Tomb Raider and Quake. And Civ2 beat both (at least in gaming reviews). Civ3 will shake up the pot again.

[Eli]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by cpoulos on 01-24-2001 01:57 PM</font>
What he said!
<font size=1 face=Arial color=444444>[This message has been edited by cpoulos (edited January 24, 2001).]</font>
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

I think he meant sleeperservice...

[Eli]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by sleeperservice on 01-20-2001 11:48 AM</font>

You got to make something new because a old thing improved is just boring if you have played the old for 100 of hours.

<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Really? Then why do we all play CivII?

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font>If you have played the civ2 game 500 hours then you are not going to enjoy ct1 more that 50 hours because the game is not much different and you get bored.

If you played ctp1 for 100 hours then after 20 hours of ctp2 you get very bored.
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

You miss a point here.
If we wont play a lot in a game from the same style but different and improved, why will we play for hundreds of hours in the SAME old game?
After all it is all over again, everything is the same(that's what the Civ haters say).

In conclusion :

BURN HIM AT THE STAKE!

[TCO]

Just becuase some of us still like Civ2, doesn't meant the genre isn't in trouble. It's all about the market share, right Ming?

[Chris 62]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Eli on 01-27-2001 09:11 AM</font>
I think he meant sleeperservice...


<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>

Eli, your right. I sure did!

[Chris 62]

<center><table width=80%><tr><td><font color=000080 face="Verdana" size=2><font size="1">quote:
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1>
</font><font size=1>Originally posted by Eli on 01-27-2001 09:16 AM</font>


BURN HIM AT THE STAKE!
<img src="/images/blue1.gif" width=100% height=1></font></td></tr></table></center>
Yeah! Burn, Baby Burn!!!

[sleeperservice]

Well many people here say that they love old civ games ctp smac.
But you know thats not enough.
What matters is how new games are going to sell.
Although smac was good and so ctp1 and ctp2 they werent a mega hit.
So at this time the genre is in trouble.
Everybodys hope is in the new game civ 3 .
But this game does not need to sell good it needs to be a mega hit .Here and now in order to make a good game you need to spend a huge fortune to make a great game .So if civ 3 is not a mega hit and nobody is going to spend a lot of money in civ 4 or anyother game.

Now is civ 3 going to be any good ?
I am sure that its going to be the best civ ever.
Is this enough to met mega sales .No it isnt.

From http://www.firaxis.com/civ3/asktheteam_011901.cfm

:::
Thought you'd never ask! Yes we are addressing these ideas fairly vigorously. Culture and nationality will play dramatic roles in your Civilization's history. We have systems for reflecting cultural value of cities and civilizations that depend upon the players use of his resources
Ok thats good
:::
and
:::
Simon,

First off, we think the AI is progressing very nicely.

The diplomacy model is being completely overhauled to allow trading of many, many types of resources, commodities, Agreements, Technologies, units, gold, and cities in practically any combination that you can trick your opponent into accepting :-)

This is one of our primary areas of focus.

Thanks for asking!
::::
thats good also hopefully it will be just like smac.

But are these kind of changes good enough to make civ 3 original ?

From what i read is a game that will combine the strentghs of civ 2 and ctp and smac hopefully without compining their weakneses.

But is that enough to make it a mega hit ?.

No and I am going to tell you right now why.

A)Because of graphicks.
Yes you might think this is funny because these thinks in civ type games always suck compared with all other games and it didnt made any difference.
But now its different.All these people that are addicted in tbs dont need any such thinks but all the other people see civ-games graphicks and they suck.
Let a 15 year old child see a sacrifice screenshot and a civ-type one and you know civ-type screenshots suck big type.
Everybody says that they dont need them but right just like night does not need the day.

Maybe a fix would be to make fights 3-d and give player total control specially with many units in each square. But that would make a 24 hours game to last 48 hours.

and as for hardcore fans it would be original.Yes the best compination of smac civ ctp but nothing original.

P.S Some people try to put Sleeper in the stake.
Sleeper breaks free captures them and locks them in prison.Citizen arrest.