If you don't like Firaxis' defaults...

[Steve Clark]

Sorry to keep hollering about this but a simple declarative statement needs to be made as we get closer to the release.

Don’t feel you have to accept Firaxis’ defaults for Civ3.

In other words,

if you don’t like any of the 16 default civs, customize one yourself or download someone else’s custom civs;

if you don’t like any of the default terrain graphics, customize one yourself or download someone else’s custom terrains;

if you don’t like any of the default unit graphics, customize one yourself or download someone else’s custom units;

if you don’t like any of the default unique units, customize one yourself or download someone else’s custom units or not play with them;

if you don’t like any of the default maps, customize one yourself or download someone else’s custom maps;

and if you don’t like the default tech tree, customize one yourself or download someone else’s custom tree;

and on and on to include scenarios, wonders, buildings, skins, animations, etc.

I believe there will be nothing terribly wrong with the defaults but they are only a starting point for customizing them into something you might like better. Just like with Civ2, the defaults worked just fine but all of the thousands of custom files allow it to expand and increase longevity.

[Wiglaf]

I don't think the worries come in with customization features. Sure, there's some concern, but the main attention goes to the AI and graphics (say what you want, but no way am I downloading a third party terrain set or making my own - that didn't happen with SMAC, no reason to think it will here).

Agreed, the defaults are good and can be changed, but any core gameplay problems will probably stick until a hardcore patch or expansion. I can't download a better game from the mod community, that responsibility lies with Firaxis when civ3 ships.

Who complains about the tech tree, anyway?

[red_jon]

Oh, good - another DIY person

Why should we have to do things ourselves if we pay for the game? I seem to remember with both CTP games we have to download loads of patches and mods for them to be any good. If we want to comment on if something is wrong, that is our business

[Shadowstrike]

You have a great point. How many of us that have played Civ since its beginning days have not used customized tech trees, units terrains, and so forth? The greatness of Civ lies in its replayability, flexibility, and adaptability.

Which reminds me, I have to put my customized Civ2 units back in soon.

[dainbramaged13]

Originally posted by Shadowstrike
You have a great point. How many of us that have played Civ since its beginning days have not used customized tech trees, units terrains, and so forth?

for one, me. And for almost everyone who has never been to apolyton, them too.

[Steve Clark]

Originally posted by Shadowstrike
You have a great point. How many of us that have played Civ since its beginning days have not used customized tech trees, units terrains, and so forth? The greatness of Civ lies in its replayability, flexibility, and adaptability.

Perfectly said. CtP and SMAC was not as replayable, flexible and adaptable as Civ2, imo. They were just not designed that way. Civ2 was, and perhaps the lack of understanding of the power and joy of customizing.

wiglaf: What Microprose shipped with Civ2 was just a starting point, knowing full well that any one of us could customize it to our own personal prefences. I didn't have to use the HiRes4 custom units and cities, but I like them (since I helped Tim on them). Nothing wrong with that and nothing wrong with not using them. Don't you think having more options in the way things look or act is a good thing? Replayability, flexibility and adaptability are the most important characteristics of any Sid's Civ games.

red_jon: Check out the Customizing vs Modding thread. Your post proves my point in the perception that having to download modpack in CtP was a negative thing, while it's just the opposite with Civ2 where such thing were meant to enhance or just be different for the sake of replayability, flexibility and adaptability.

[Steve Clark]

Originally posted by dainbramaged13


for one, me. And for almost everyone who has never been to apolyton, them too.

You're kidding, right? You have NEVER played a Civ2 scenario?

This is not meant for you but just a rhetorical question. If you have not experienced the replayability, flexibility and adaptability of Civ2, how can you comment on the design choices of Civ3??? CtP has or shouldn't have anything to do with Civ3 since that was a completely different product by a very different company. IMO.

[Moral Hazard]

The Graphics Bar is Higher

I never again expect to see a game with as many customized units, terrain etc. as civ2 had; because making graphics which look decent now is extremely hard. This of course doesn't effect mod makers, but will make scenarios less accepted, IMO.

It may be superflous to some of you; but when you've got non-animating graphics walking around next to animating ones it seems odd to an average gamer. Plus if they do a CTP and not include a nice sprite creator I'm only expecting a handfull of unit graphics.

BTW does anyone know if there are scenarios packaged with the game? Without prepackaged scenarios I'm a bit worried about scenario support.

[Moral Hazard]

Oh and are you sure that terrain graphics can be edited?

[VetLegion]

how do I edit the MP detault?

[Steve Clark]

Originally posted by Moral Hazard
Oh and are you sure that terrain graphics can be edited?

In Civ2, they were no differently graphically than a unit. They would be just small .gif or .bmp patterns, that's all. For example, irrigation has its own slot in the file and if don't like the color (too light of a blue), then just clip out the default and replace it with it one that's darker.

Vet:

[yin26]

Steve knows he has my support, and ultimately it will be guys like him who keep Civ3 on the HD's of the hardcore players among us who see playing a new scenario of Civ is more entertaining than buying a new game.

HOWEVER:

As I've said before, Steve takes a 'Civ Construction Set' approach to the game. But a vast, VAST majority of gamers do not and will not. They expect the game to be either awesome out of the box or close enough that a patch or two will fix any issues. They then expect an X-pack to add what was missing...then another release to add even more.

Very few players can or even want to make the game that they feel the company should have made in the first place.

[Father Beast]

Let's not forget - Comparison Games and succession games.

These two types depend heavily on all the players having the same version. if (heaven forbid) there is a lousy imbalance in game mechanics, then challenges will have to be not just - "small map, 16 civs, raging hordes, deity", but will have to become - "small map, 16 civs, raging hordes, deity, and Sam's rules mod (to prevent ICS)".

Like I said to Korn, a lot of people will refuse to play unless you are using the original rules set, however imbalanced (heaven Forfend) it may be.

Kind of silly, but there it is.

[JellyDonut]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
Who complains about the tech tree, anyway?

Me! They put Alphabet before Writing again. I guess I'll just switch the names and it'll cause no problem but it doesn't make any realistic sense! Pictographs and ideographs were well-functioning writing systems long before the alphabet was invented! And what are you going to do with an alphabet if you can't write anything?!

[Moral Hazard]

Steve:

I know you could in Civ2. Whether it can be edited in Civ3 is the question. I'm concerned that the game won't even work well as a Creation Kit. As I've iterated, I'm worried that Firaxis concentrated on the core part of the game, Vanilla SP; and will try to add everything else later.