Will Civ3 Have A Scripting Language?

[Mister Pleasant]

CTP is not a good game. Not CTP1, and definately not CTP2. Modded? No, never tried it. Why? Because when a game is just THAT BAD, I have no more time to waste on it.

Should have tried it. Locutus wrote some kick ass SLIC (CTPs scripting language). And yes, Civ3 needs a scripting language if only so that the infidels here can appreciate the mighty works o' Locutus.

And if you want to talk fun and challenge - I got a hell of alot of that from Mods by people like Locutus and Wes. And fun's what its about. As far as I'm concerned, if Sid is a god, then Locutus is a minor diety in his own right among that pantheon.

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by Locutus
Steve,
Good plan, it's getting awfully late, at least in my timezone. However, from tomorrow onward I'll be out of town (and away from an Internet connection) for a couple of days, so don't be surprised if I don't reply to your reply anytime soon...

Anunikoba,
Actually, CtP gained the Civ community many more members than it lost (if any), something which you wouldn't know since I hardly ever see you in the CtP community so you don't who has a background there and who doesn't (I could easily name dozens of people who got into Civ because of CtP).

As far as the quality of CtP goes, you have your opinion and I have mine. I fully respect and can understand yours and I hope you do the same with mine (though seeing some of the posts you made today I have my doubts about that).

Is doubt based on opinion?

I do respect your opinion of CTP. Actually, the only reason I bash the game so much is the wasted potential that never saw the light because the CTP games were just not well produced (I have a feeling that the programmers weren't so much to blame as Activision was). And I don't doubt that the mods did make the game an enjoyable one.

[hexagonian]

Anunikoba is right, the main problem is that Activision should of spent more time on polishing up their products for release (both CTP1 and CTP2). Given time, CTP2 could of been a great release 'out-of-the-box'. I remind everyone that the initial response to CTP2's release was more glowing than the release of CTP1, until the limitations in the AI were exposed. Having been through the CTP2 files, I had enough questions about why Activision made some of their decisions on the AI settings - and if Activision had taken more time, these issues could of been fixed.

At that point, if CTP2 had been more fully developed, would the civ2 community have embraced CTP2. I somewhat doubt it, because of the following...

What many people forget is that many civ2 players are fiercely loyal to the Sid Meier civ franchise, and have preferences, that if not met, are resisted (ie: PW vs. Settlers, the inclusion of certain Wonders, the use of unconventional units in the CTP series, and so forth) So many of the gripes against the CTP series have boiled down to these preference issues.

And yes, the weak AI...but I've also heard enough about the severe limitations in civ2 in that regard.

Since civ1/civ2 were the groundbreakers, many of the feelings that players have for any new games are always measured up against the feelings that were experienced with your first game. I started out with CTP1, and having tried both TOT and played SMAC, I have yet to capture the same feeling that I had with CTP1.

Most of what I have personally done in my Modwork has been though working with the text files, plus AI boosts (which would be comperable to the changes made in the civ2 Rules.txt files). But CTP SLIC writers such as Locutus, Immortal Wombat and others can really accomplish a great deal through their work, adding many atmospheric elements (like leaders, disasters, additional AI boosts, Elite civ units, militia units and so forth). It's somewhat ironic that many of these features are being incorporated in civ3, and are being trumpeted as revolutionary (like the inclusion of leaders) or have been incorporated into SMAC (disasters) were available to be created in CTP2. Too bad Activision did not do some of these features right off the bat. (And they actually released a Scenario that incorporated Leader units with the game - but did not include that element in the default game.)

The main point is that CTP2 has the ability to create these and other innovations - almost unlimited, whereas these types of changes were not possible in SMAC/civ2, and is now looking like it is not possible in civ3.

And recently, I took a look at the SMAC files - realizing that I am not familiar with them, it still seemed to me that the files for CTP2 were easier to work with and more clearly defined too - it remains to be seen if civ3 files will be easier to alter.

I fully expect that 'out-of-the-box' civ3 will be better than 'out-of-the-box' CTP1 and CTP2. I am looking forward to the release of civ3, and will be playing it, but frankly, like Locutus, I will probably get more enjoyment out of CTP2 because of that built-in flexibility and Modability.

[old timer]

Count me amongst the few who are very disappointed in the lack of a scripting language. I thought the trend in strategy games was to provide some kind of AI modding, but perhaps this news is just more evidence of Firaxis having to rush Civ III out the door. Even a virtually unheard of RTS game called Submarine Titans had a pretty good scripting language (better than AOK's) and yet the "great" Civ III won't.

I realize that most people won't care, but they don't know what they'll be missing. With a scripting language it's possible to make the AI perform very noticeably better in not only random maps, but scenarios as well.

I wonder how long people who have played Civ type games before, will be able to enjoy single player Civ III? I guess I'm different than most since I already know that if I buy Civ III, I'll be bored within a very short time. Originally, I was planning on modding the AI, but now that's out, so I guess I'd be dumb to buy a game that I'll only enjoy for two weeks or so. Oh wait, I forgot, I could just play multiplayer after I get bored with single player.

To those of you who feel the need to defend Civ III, don't bother, as I'm not really knocking it. I'm sure it will be a great game for many, but it could have been so much more. I was so looking forward to buying it, but now I guess I'll wait and see if they improve it later by adding MP and scripting. Now that I think about it, they'll probably never add scripting so... Oh forget it.

[St Leo]

What I'm thinking is that the editor will essentially be the equivalant of cheat mode, map editor, and game files access (rules, graphics, etc.), rolled into one package.

IDE's suck for true masters develop with text editors and command line compilers.

[Urban Ranger]

You're no match for the wizards who program in binary.


Back to the topic. I don't understand why Firaxis didn't implement a scripting language or even macros. This issue was discussed to death several times way back when.

Having a scripting language will let players replace the lackluster AI routines come with the game.

Why are the AI routines lackluster, you might ask. It's simple. These are rule-based, or so called expert systems. So they are only as good at the game as the progammers, who will take a backseat to we who analyse games to death.

[Roman]

I am sure a member of the Firaxis team confirmed the availibility of a macro, or a scripting language (I don't know what is the difference) at some point in the past. That means this is a feature they planned, but have not implemented due to time constraints.

[Urban Ranger]

They could have written the scripting language first, then write the AI stuff in the language.