The problem with this place.

[dainbramaged13]

The #1 problem with these civ3 forums is that there are so many people on here who believe that the civ series was and is supposed to b a simulation of history and the real world. SORRY TO SAY GUYS, BUT THIS ISN'T TRUE! Civ and its successors are supposed to be FUN above all else, while trying to incorporate realism into it, because as it happens, the fact of realism does add an element to fun. BUT - the number ONE aspect of civ is FUN, NOT REALISM, and that is what some of us ned to remind ourselves when we post here. ALSO the game cannot be too complicated. par example: korn469's M.A.D. idea. I agree with him that MAD should be included in the game, but the complexity with which he wanted it included could be another game on its own, or at least a modpack in civ, but not part of the game. the amount of time spent on each feature, i believe, is pretty large, and therefore, such complicated things cannot and shouldn't, for the sake of balance, be included in the game.
This is also a reason why firaxians do not post here often, because they are afraid.

that is all

[Gramphos]

May I suggest that you read the post under this.
It is true, he knows what he speaks about.

The first time I have use for the time error.

[Rhuarc]

BRAVO!! BRAVO!!!
It's about time somebody threw that out into the open!! It is a GAME for Christ's sake people!! I enjoy the realism too, but if it isn't fun then what is the point? And the whole point in mod's and scenarios is so that those of you who want on age represented more, or any one of a thousand other little nitty grtty details in can have it, but it won't bug those who don't want it in!!

[rah]

Ditto Ditto,
I hope the boys have stopped checking in here. While a lot of this stuff is fun to read and argue in a hypothetical way, most of it would ruin a good game.

Then there all the garbage threads and those with the real ridiculous ideas. Which I guess are good because it just adds to the chaos and makes it harder to find any actual good ideas. And hopefully scares people away.

If more than 2 or 3% of the ideas here are incorporated to the game, it will be a huge failure.

And if they're this late in the development and still coming here to find additional ideas, we're really in trouble.

Don't get me wrong. There has been a wealth of great concepts discussed, but I don't want to see them incorporated into the game.

The only real things I hope they were paying attention to were the problems and the cheats. They need to be addressed.

All I want is a playable game with a Better AI.

RAH
(end rant mode)

[Grumbold]

I entirely agree, but it is a balance between fun and historical detail. Without any historical detail you might as well be playing Frogger or Super Mario. Without any fun you might as well just read history books and then write alternate history essays. What we will never all agree upon is what level of simplification makes it pointless or what level of detail makes it too turgid. We all want our own favourite "improvements" in the next game - we just have a hard time getting a solid majority in favour of many of them.

[dainbramaged13]

Thank you, Thank you


Grumbold is right - we do have to find a perfect balance, and that is hard, and i think the perfect balance is the exact point where the realism stops adding to the fun of the game. I know this is nearly impossible to find, but we must eliminate ideas like hexes - while it may make more sense in every way, its just not CIV-ish! Do you know what i mean?

Also, i started this as a new thread, how did gramphos post before me?

[rah]

He took advantage of the Time Warps that have been occuring to the server recently to have a little fun.

RAH

[Steve Clark]

This definitely reminds of some of the discussions we had when we were putting The List together. Some agreed that it was a good intellectual exercise but with the hope that they would never get implemented. Others, however, clung to their ludicrous ideas, not having any clues as to their viability or impact upon playing the game. I imagine Firaxis has had a great time at the expense of some the folks here.

[rah]

Yea, I can just see the Developers reading some of the stuff posted here and just laughing and laughing. "THEY WANT WHAT?" haaahhahahahhahahahahahahah. I personally liked some of the combat models that would have made each battle last about an hour.

Realism is one thing, playability is another. And it is a fine line to walk.

RAH

[Marquis de Sodaq]

I've been one to back an idea because it adds a touch of realism to the game, but never have I thought Civ was a simulation of history. Grumbold hits the nail on the head. The added bit that I find fun might annoy Rah. Anything that requires more attention or micromanagement will probably not be welcome by many players at all, even one like me. What is wanted are details that occur in the game, but do not add to the players' worries or tasks. Color, if you will.

Civ is a game, nothing more. What is fun changes with the player. Modpacks will surely fill in the gaps of interest. Too many ideas that come up are wasted breath, as modpacks will be able to add that element to the game, should one wish to have it. The legitimate ideas to address to the game makers (altho it's now clearly too late) would be the ones that can't be added with customization.

[Theben]

Hey, I still think my combat model was the best!!! And it incorporated gameplay AND realism! If Firaxis doesn't use it they're nuts!! It could ruin civ3! I REFURE TO BUY CIV3 UNLESS THEY USE MY COMBAT MODEL!!!!!!!!!

I do agree with the premise here, but I for one would like attention paid to historical details, while realizing that we're re-creating history, not paralleling it, and that gameplay comes 1st.

Maybe there's still time to make civ3 a 1st-person shooter...

[To_Serve_Man]

Re: The problem with this place.

Originally posted by dainbramaged13
The #1 problem with these civ3 forums is that there are so many people on here who believe that the civ series was and is supposed to b a simulation of history and the real world. SORRY TO SAY GUYS, BUT THIS ISN'T TRUE! Civ and its successors are supposed to be FUN above all else, while trying to incorporate realism into it, because as it happens, the fact of realism does add an element to fun. BUT - the number ONE aspect of civ is FUN, NOT REALISM, and that is what some of us ned to remind ourselves when we post here. ALSO the game cannot be too complicated. par example: korn469's M.A.D. idea. I agree with him that MAD should be included in the game, but the complexity with which he wanted it included could be another game on its own, or at least a modpack in civ, but not part of the game. the amount of time spent on each feature, i believe, is pretty large, and therefore, such complicated things cannot and shouldn't, for the sake of balance, be included in the game.
This is also a reason why firaxians do not post here often, because they are afraid.

that is all

In total agreement...

[Inverse Icarus]

hey, Sid hasn't made a bad civ game yet.

have faith.

::kneels down::

:rays::

::a beta forms in his hands::

[Steve Clark]

You guys remember the Sid Meier's QuarterMaster 'idea'? It seemed that for a while, when anyone posted an 'idea' (esp. from those in the crappy SMAC, CtP camp), you always get a number of responses saying,

That's a great idea, I hope Firaxis (blah, blah)...

[joseph1944]

Since I have been saying hold on guy almost from the start, this Thread is going to be one of the best thread ever. This game is going to one of the best ever, if everyone would give it a chance.
And since a lot of people will not read every post here, let me mention that Computer Gaming World still has Aug 2001 listed as the release date. If the game was 50% a month ago and is 85% two weeks ago, how far along are they now?