Let's face it...

[civcop]

Civ 3 will thrill a great many and yet cause others to grumble and complain. From, "There's no MP!" to "The AI sucks!", those who are umimpressed will compile a list of flaws with Civ 3 while those who appreciate it will laud its virtues.

It appears that the more "sophisticated" players are at least suspicious of Civ 3 (if they haven't already written it off as crap) and the more trusting and/or less demanding players hold out faith in Sid and Firaxis and will most likely enjoy the game. For the most critical, Civ 3 will be sub par no matter its features. The game could induce orgasms and they would still find something to complain about. What intrigues me as much or more than how the game will play is whether or not the harshest critics and most jaded players will eat crow if the game is actually good.

[korn469]

what we must remember is that it is only a game...yes one i have been waiting on for the past two years, but still it is only a game

like you say some will love it, some will hate it, most of the world's population won't even play it

but most important, there will always be room for improvement, so civ1 sucked a few weeks out of my life, civ2 a few months, civ3 a few years, civ4 a few decades

[Bkeela]

I would positively hate Civ III if it pleased the so called "sophisticated" player.

All games should strictly adhere to the KISS principle: Keep It Simple Stupid.

Bkeela.

[Blake]

I'm one of the faithfull.

Firaxis can do no evil. It's all good.
And if they make the AI moddable I wont even have to gripe about that .

[Adm.Naismith]

Point 1) Most of people who are afraid of a Civ III flop would love to see a Great Game, still if it cost them to eat something

Point 2) As for movies and books critics and readers can often debate and never fully agree. That's fine for me: is not as if we need a "standing ovation" for every products we buy.

Point 3) This game is one of the most relevant case when so many people tried to help developers posting and sending an excessive, stunning amount of suggestion, hints, models....

If you take something to your heart is understandable you are more ready to debate and complain if something goes "wrong" (in your point of view).

This will not be a surprise, IMHO.

[Father Beast]

Re: Let's face it...

Originally posted by civcop
those who are umimpressed will compile a list of flaws with Civ 3 while those who appreciate it will laud its virtues.

I think maybe both. I still find flaws about civ2, but I keep going back and playing it.

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by Bkeela
I would positively hate Civ III if it pleased the so called "sophisticated" player.

All games should strictly adhere to the KISS principle: Keep It Simple Stupid.

Bkeela.

I'd hate Civ3 if it was geared for the "idiot" player.

All games should NOT adhere to the KISS otherwise you'd miss out on games like Age of Kings, SimCity, Homeworld, any and all flight sims, MOO3 (hopefully), Railroad Tycoon, etc.

If you want a simple game go play solitaire and leave the complex games to those who enjoy them.

[Martinus]

Originally posted by Ozymandous


All games should NOT adhere to the KISS otherwise you'd miss out on games like Age of Kings, SimCity, Homeworld, any and all flight sims, MOO3 (hopefully), Railroad Tycoon, etc.

Actually Age of Kings or Railroad Tycoons were simple games - it was the scope that made them extremely playable. All Civs were simple. Chess are simple.

Simple does not mean basic or plain.
Complex does not mean fun or challenging.

And SimCity never really took my attention for long. When I want complexity, lots of numbers and data, I simply go to work.

Unfortunately I can't call Godzilla to eat my boss though, just as in Sim City

edit: spelling

[Rasbelin]

Looks like you share the same ideas as Sid.
Simplicity is that what gives the game the final touch.

[Martinus]

Yes. I mean there is nothing wrong with implementing new ideas. But after the first stage of development, there need to be a second one - cutting off the redundant ones and making the game run with the same simple engine.

[Mister Pleasant]

What intrigues me as much or more than how the game will play is whether or not the harshest critics and most jaded players will eat crow if the game is actually good.

I'm sure the gameplay will be good. I like what I've seen with respect to resources and culture. BUT

I'm concerned that instead of an improved AI, Firaxis has concentrated on animated leaders who for the most part look like clownshoes. (Exception: Lou Diamond Phillips makes a great Montezuma). But I think the AI will be reasonable, and hey, they may even suprise me. Also, I can replace dopey animated leaders with photographs according to Firaxis (which also means I can change leaders entirely). I guess Firaxis copied one thing from Activistion. But I don't like the leaders, so I won't eat crow there unless the art totally changes (fat chance). Won't eat crow on the AI either, again I'm sure it will be reasonable.

Where I will level my harshest criticism is at the following two items -
(1) No Scripting Language! Here is where Activision actually introduced an important innovation. Because Civ3 will not have such a language, Civ3 is really a step backwards with this lacuna. One, it allows modmakers improve on the game and create really cool scenarios. I had some great ideas about alien scenarios . . .
(2) No Social Engineering. This was a great innovation in SMAC. Instead we are stuck with a civ1 political model ten or so years later in civ3. Boring!

Will I eat crow? Nope. I'm sure I'll enjoy the game out of the box, but the fact is it could have been better and we all know it.

[Mister Pleasant]

Firaxis can do no evil. It's all good.

Do you own stock? Are you an employee? If not, what do you care?

A software developer is only as good as their last few products. If Firaxis makes a good game, I'll buy it. If they crap in a box, stamp "Sid Meier's Sh!t" on the front, I won't (not even if a beefy roll of toilet paper is included). Firaxis is only a company, people.

[Mankind]

Originally posted by Mister Pleasant


If they crap in a box, stamp "Sid Meier's Sh!t" on the front, I won't (not even if a beefy roll of toilet paper is included). Firaxis is only a company, people.

even if they add a poster?

[Th0mas]

Originally posted by Mister Pleasant
..........If they crap in a box, stamp "Sid Meier's Sh!t" on the front, I won't (not even if a beefy roll of toilet paper is included)....

Do you think they will release the limited edition?

[cassembler]

here's what I think

I remember playing Civ2 for the first few months and it [seemingly] had no flaws... as the years rolled by, however, they became very obvious to me (mostly the AI- everything else was and still is acceptably ok to me). Dang, they could have just rewritten the AI for Civ2 and I'd still pay $50 for it.

I will buy Civ3, and I will play it, and I will like it.
I can already tell that Firaxis has their poo together.
Kudos.