CivIII is not sequel to CivII

[Sarxis]

You have to remember something: CivIII is really two generations removed from CivII. Alpha Centauri saw a great deal of development in the ideas that are contained in CIV. I have observed that many of the soon-to-be CivIII owners have never played SMAC, so a lot of the 'new features' and 'big evolutionary steps' in CivIII are really carry overs or somewhat modified features of Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri.

And besides this, there have been three other CIV releases since CivII besides SMAC as well: CTP 1&2, and ToT. I am certain that these games have contributed, even if in very small ways, to the direction CivIII is heading, even if just to show 'what not to do' in a Civilizatioin game.

[drake]

Then why is it called civ3?

I don't know......everything I've heard leads me to believe the basic civ foundation will be used.

I expect some innovations and improvements, but we're going to see a genuine civ product. Not a knock off.....

So I'd guess I'd say that I disagree with you.

[Grumbold]

*Warning* Pessimistic content



What I regret about Civ III is that when Firaxis announced their objective to be making the best Civilization game ever, I expected them to be taking CtP I, II, MGE, ToT and SMAC into account. Unfortunately this does not seem to be the case. Anything that has not previously appeared in vanilla Civ I or II is heralded as an improvement while some very good facets of the other games have been ignored as if they never existed.

What we are getting certainly looks like its going to be better than original Civ II. Having played all those other games I expected a lot more from that statement of Firaxis than they have seemed willing to deliver. I will still be waiting for a future product to marry Civ III with the good features from the other games that got left out.

[Provost Harrison]

Well I would discount the CtP line as they were a radical departure from the civ/SMAC line, and in my opinion a failure, although can be studied as an example of what not to do in a civ game But this game is drawing from all it's predecessors; from civ, giving it the atmosphere and feel of simplicity this game had. From civ2 with much more advanced military combat and diplomacy, but improving further still on these. From col, with the trading of resources, altered for the game, and many of the ingenious improvements that were in SMAC. So in terms of game, yeah, it is the successor to Civ2, but there has been a lot of 'water under the bridge' since then, and a lot has been learnt since about what to do and what not to do. This should, and I am confident, will, result in the greatest civ game yet!

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by drake
Then why is it called civ3?

I don't know......everything I've heard leads me to believe the basic civ foundation will be used.

I expect some innovations and improvements, but we're going to see a genuine civ product. Not a knock off.....

So I'd guess I'd say that I disagree with you.

Well, I guess I can say that you didn't get my point.

The point is that CivIII isn't being released RIGHT after CivII. A lot of things have occurred in the CIV universe, and I think the time gap between CivII and CivIII is substantial. Yeah, in the strictest sense, CivIII is CivII's sequel. But its like what Star Wars Ep1: enough time has lapsed between the original series and the new stuff that everything has a different feel to it. Not necessarily for the worse, but the leap is big.

And Grumbold:

What I regret about Civ III is that when Firaxis announced their objective to be making the best Civilization game ever, I expected them to be taking CtP I, II, MGE, ToT and SMAC into account. Unfortunately this does not seem to be the case.

You couldn't be more wrong! A great deal of what was in CivIII's predecessors is included, or expounded upon.

And Provost: your comments is the essence of my point. CivIII has a lot more resources to draw from than just CivII, promising that this latest Sid Meier creation will be superb!

[aaglo]

Anunikoba - of course civ3 is a sequel for civ2 (IIRC the numbers are 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 and 0 ). The game has though had it bounces like a pingpongball... And congrats for the crown...

P.Harrison - Cyberdemon is awesome, emperor peguins are hilarious

[Provost Harrison]

Well exactly. When civ2 was made, they erred more on the side of cautious as it would be unknown what features would throw the gameplay totally out of whack. Now it is known how to do it better, stick with (perhaps make minor tweaks) to the major underlying game mechanics, but alter those things that are more peripheral but have potential, eg, trade, or introduce new concepts, eg, culture. It looks like they have figured out how to make a good sequel now (Civ2 was, it was a well needed update of civ, but was more conservative).

Yeah, so what if Civ3 is a conservative upgrade. CtP wasn't a conservative upgrade, and look what that was like

I can hardly wait

[drake]

Years don't change the fact that we're going to get basically the same game with some nice new bells and whistles. I expect a very similar look and feel. Don't you?

[Sarxis]

I do actually. There will be a lot of familiar things in CivIII, which is good.

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by Anunikoba
You couldn't be more wrong!

In my personal frame of reference I am absolutely correct. A lot of the concepts which IMO were superior in those games have not been included or improved upon in Civ III. Where some have been introduced they have been announced as all-new improvements as if no one had thought of them before. I accept that not all of these features were universally loved (Unit Workshop, anybody?) but I still perceive them as cuts because they are features which have previously been welcome parts of my Civ-style gaming experience which will be lacking in Civ III. If an idea is a good one, it should not be rejected because its origin came from a different source.

[Sarxis]

Originally posted by Grumbold
If an idea is a good one, it should not be rejected because its origin came from a different source.

I doubt that this is the reason these features were 'cut', as you put it. More likely, Firaxis felt that to retain the essence of CIV while also making improvements and innovations, certain things just would not fit into the mix. The Unit Workshop is a good example: this feature worked well in the futuristic SMAC, but really has no place in the more historical CivIII. But the Worker unit is a derivation of SMAC's Terraformer unit, and then some.

So even though a lot of 'good ideas' that are innapropriate for CivIII were cut, many others made it into the 'final cut'.

[Stuie]

Originally posted by Anunikoba
The Unit Workshop is a good example: this feature worked well in the futuristic SMAC....

It did? I found it to be cumbersome and ultimately useless.

As far as Civ3 being the sequel to Civ2, anything that is new compared to Civ2 will be new to the majority of gamers that have played Civ games (that meaning "Civ games by Sid", none of that CTP crap); look at sales for Civ, Civ2 and SMAC and you will find that SMAC players are a very small minority of those familiar with Civ games. Thus, the new features are "new" to Civilization as most people know it.

[Ozymandous]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
Well I would discount the CtP line as they were a radical departure from the civ/SMAC line, and in my opinion a failure, although can be studied as an example of what not to do in a civ game But this game is drawing from all it's predecessors; from civ, giving it the atmosphere and feel of simplicity this game had. From civ2 with much more advanced military combat and diplomacy, but improving further still on these. From col, with the trading of resources, altered for the game, and many of the ingenious improvements that were in SMAC. So in terms of game, yeah, it is the successor to Civ2, but there has been a lot of 'water under the bridge' since then, and a lot has been learnt since about what to do and what not to do. This should, and I am confident, will, result in the greatest civ game yet!

Hmm, so I guess resources that could actually be traded (with routes that could be pillaged), the ability to construct and use build queues for units and improvements, the ability to capture enemy units, the ability for some units to bombard other units & cities more than a a square away and stacked units in actual armies were completel failures?

I think not! Yet all of these ONLY came about in the CtP series and are now included (in a more limites fashion) in Civ3.

Unless you played CtP and looked at all the things they did right (IMHO), like more wonders, a LOT more techs and units, etc, you would say that Civ3 took nothing from these games when they, in fact, did.

Granted CtP had annoying issues, like the slaver's, lawyers, etc, but you can't say it was all bad. My hope is that Firaxis at least looked at what was innovative and worked in CtP (more than Civ fanatics might think) and incorporated them into Civ3. It looks as if they did implement some ideas, which is good.

Change is not bad, it is necessary to prevent stagnation and extinction, some folks need to learn that lesson. Anything that keeps Civ3 from simply being Civ2 with better graphics (as Civ2 was to Civ1) is a VAST improvement.

I played Civ for 2 years and was highly disappointed that Civ2 was the same game with different graphics and virtually little other improvements (other than game balance issues like unit hitpoints, etc). Civ3 sounds better than that (hopefully)

[Pembleton]

Re: CivIII is not sequel to CivII

*censored*

[Sabre2th]

Re: Re: CivIII is not sequel to CivII

Originally posted by Pembleton


I know I probably shouldn't respond to this, but I can't help myself.

My response is a huge "WHO CARES?" and "What is your point"? Should they call the game Civilization 6?

I don't understand why you are posting this.

Man, talk about coming up with a pointless idea to spam up the board.

Don't forget about the pointless posts to spam up the thread.

Some of the threads in the forum are boring, irrelevant, or whatever, but there isn't much to talk about until civ3 comes out. If you don't like it don't read it.