Tweet
If there is such a thing that's what I am. I have not posted for a while but I have read regularly and like many been thinking if Civ3 will be great. After a lot of thought I think not. Here is why:
1) The Civ3 team has talked a lot about the new features like culture, improved trade, great diplomacy, etc. I find it difficult to believe that they will be able to impliment all these features in a well balanced way. There is just too much. What concerns me even more is that I very much doubt they will be able to build an AI good enough to take advantage of all these new features. I am unconvinced that the same company (and team?) that developed a complex game like SMAC but failed to improve the AI over Civ2 is now suddenly going to find the secret and create an AI that can function well in an even more complex game like Civ3. Rather than adding a whole host of new features they should have concentrated on making the AI use the ones effectively that were there originally. In conclusion, the game has just too many features to balance well and have a competent AI.
2) I get the feeling that Sid is trying to reclaim old glory much in the way an old football player plays one more season to see if he can dominate like he once did earlier in his career. Sadly, the player most often retires in disgrace half way through that season if he even made it through training camp at all (It's extremely difficult to rediscover that old magic). In my opinion Sid has not had a big hit since the original Civ. Sure Civ2 was great but he didn't even make it he just lent his name to it. I don't think Civ3 will succeed because I don't think Sid has that spark of innovation and determination that he had when he made the original.
3) I think that it is inevitable that Civ3 will launch before christmas even if it is done or not. Why? Back in 1991 when Sid made Civ1 he was working for Microprose and had no business to support he was an employee. He could work on it will less pressure, with less concern about a deadline, and refine it until he felt if was ready. Now in 2001 he is a founding member/owner of Firaxis and has a vested interest in having the company make it (if it goes bankrupt so does he). So if given the choice between getting Civ3 out for the christmas, making a bundle, and keeping his business running or holding Civ3 back until it's perfect and having his business go under I'm sure he'd choose the latter which is why I think the game will suffer.
4) When the original Civ came out it was revolutionary and the public had nothing to compare it to hence, it received great reviews. Civ 2 was a surprise hit and built well upon the first. Now that there are so many rabid and demanding fans of this series there is no way that Civ3 can live up to expectations. I think Civ2 was a RARE sequel success that in my opinion won't be repeated with Civ3.
I understand there will be those who will flame me but I had to voice my opinion or my own sanity would have been at risk.
Granted I did say I was a hopeful pessimist. I am. I very much hope that I'm wrong but I think not.
Simple yet........ well just simple.
1) The Civ3 team has talked a lot about the new features like culture, improved trade, great diplomacy, etc. I find it difficult to believe that they will be able to impliment all these features in a well balanced way. There is just too much. What concerns me even more is that I very much doubt they will be able to build an AI good enough to take advantage of all these new features. I am unconvinced that the same company (and team?) that developed a complex game like SMAC but failed to improve the AI over Civ2 is now suddenly going to find the secret and create an AI that can function well in an even more complex game like Civ3. Rather than adding a whole host of new features they should have concentrated on making the AI use the ones effectively that were there originally. In conclusion, the game has just too many features to balance well and have a competent AI.
2) I get the feeling that Sid is trying to reclaim old glory much in the way an old football player plays one more season to see if he can dominate like he once did earlier in his career. Sadly, the player most often retires in disgrace half way through that season if he even made it through training camp at all (It's extremely difficult to rediscover that old magic). In my opinion Sid has not had a big hit since the original Civ. Sure Civ2 was great but he didn't even make it he just lent his name to it. I don't think Civ3 will succeed because I don't think Sid has that spark of innovation and determination that he had when he made the original.
3) I think that it is inevitable that Civ3 will launch before christmas even if it is done or not. Why? Back in 1991 when Sid made Civ1 he was working for Microprose and had no business to support he was an employee. He could work on it will less pressure, with less concern about a deadline, and refine it until he felt if was ready. Now in 2001 he is a founding member/owner of Firaxis and has a vested interest in having the company make it (if it goes bankrupt so does he). So if given the choice between getting Civ3 out for the christmas, making a bundle, and keeping his business running or holding Civ3 back until it's perfect and having his business go under I'm sure he'd choose the latter which is why I think the game will suffer.
4) When the original Civ came out it was revolutionary and the public had nothing to compare it to hence, it received great reviews. Civ 2 was a surprise hit and built well upon the first. Now that there are so many rabid and demanding fans of this series there is no way that Civ3 can live up to expectations. I think Civ2 was a RARE sequel success that in my opinion won't be repeated with Civ3.
I understand there will be those who will flame me but I had to voice my opinion or my own sanity would have been at risk.
Granted I did say I was a hopeful pessimist. I am. I very much hope that I'm wrong but I think not.
Simple yet........ well just simple.
your club does seem to share many of my Civ3 beliefs.
Comment