civ3 in new york times

[dainbramaged13]

look, heres an article about civ3, found through the civ3 yahoo group (whose vic_healy anyway)

In historical games, truth gives way to entertainment

It basically says something that we (or I) have realised here at apolyton, that historical accuracy is not the point of civ - FUN is, this is also what sid has been hinting at for a while (and lat+++++blatantly shouting at us)

[Fidel]

drain, this was already a news item, firaxis update item and a thread here.

[lord of the mark]

Re: civ3 in new york times

Originally posted by dainbramaged13
look, heres an article about civ3, found through the civ3 yahoo group (whose vic_healy anyway)

In historical games, truth gives way to entertainment

It basically says something that we (or I) have realised here at apolyton, that historical accuracy is not the point of civ - FUN is, this is also what sid has been hinting at for a while (and lat+++++blatantly shouting at us)

That is not at all what Sid says. Heres what he says:'"We're not trying to duplicate history," he said. "We're trying to provide you with the tools, the elements of history and let you see how it would work if you took over."'

In other words not "history on rails" but a historical what if game - heres what WOULD have happened if I had taken over and tried a different strategy from the one actually followed. TO acheive that purpose historically accurate rules and models (but definitely not aaccurate results) are required.

The voices against historical accuracy in the article are from Bruce Shelley and the webmaster for the heavengate AOE site. Not at all surprising, considering the nature of the AOE series.

LOTM

[dainbramaged13]

Originally posted by LaRusso
drain, this was already a news item, firaxis update item and a thread here.

-i didn't see the thread - btw i looked at the last three pages until the 6th (when the nyt article was posted), and didn't see it (maybe i made a mistake, if so, my bad)
-whaddaya mean by 'firaxis update item'?

btw, i just looked and saw the news item... i only check the civ3 news items - i asssumed that it would be in there, if it were a news item..

anyway, sorry, i looked and didn't see.. but i was wrong

[Lancer]

dainbramaged, thanks!

I missed this the first time arround and would have missed it completely if you hadn't made this thread. Much appreciated!

[Ralf]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
In other words not "history on rails" but a historical what if game - heres what WOULD have happened if I had taken over and tried a different strategy from the one actually followed.

Above is only true for advanced script-guided historic scenarios. And even then it cant quite compete with "Europa Universalis" in terms of "believable, but alternative history" (although I hope scenario-builders are given more exact control in Civ-3 scenarios, in order to achieve something similar).

But for a regular random map main-game session, its not even that. I would describe Civ as a strategy-game for the earth-empire megalomaniacs amongst us - with some accurate earth-historical props and backdrops. And thats absolutely great.

Originally posted by Lancer
I missed this the first time arround and would have missed it completely if you hadn't made this thread.

Feel free to copy-quote the article under this topic. I dont get/have any access to the text in question.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ralf


Above is only true for advanced script-guided historic scenarios. And even then it cant quite compete with "Europa Universalis" in terms of "believable, but alternative history" (although I hope scenario-builders are given more exact control in Civ-3 scenarios, in order to achieve something similar).

But for a regular random map main-game session, its not even that. I would describe Civ as a strategy-game for the earth-empire megalomaniacs amongst us - with some accurate earth-historical props and backdrops. And thats absolutely great.

Much more than props and backdrops. See my column.

LOTM