Tweet
There are several parts of civ3 that I find to be sorely lacking.
1) Artificial Intelligence - we've all seen AIs do stupid things
2) Map Generator - I've seen too many Pangaeas that aren't. And there need to be more parameters, like resource clustering/distribution factor, civs per continent, number of continents, and no doubt more.
3) Editor - Where to begin.... No zoomed out view. No adding of new units/civs/etc. Tools are still clunky to use. Selected/Cut/Copy/Paste not implemented.
Now, these seem to be ready candidates for having their source opened. Why? Well, none of these three are core civ3 parts. They all enhance the game, but are not really a part of the core engine. So nobody would gain from having the code for these pieces; it's not as though they could replicate civ3. And these parts are specialized for civ3, so they would most likely not be of much use elsewhere. And anyway, any competing games studio that tried to exploit the open source would get sued into oblivion. What would we gain? Well, if we had multiple independent AI routines available, the AIs wouldn't be so predictable. Some of them would operate from completely different code bases than others. I don't think Soren is likely to program an AI that does an all-out rush (builds ONLY cities and military units and tries to destroy everyone early), but it might be interesting to play against one (the Mongols, the Huns, etc....). The AI shows real growth from previously, but it still all came from the same minds as to what goals are important, how to analyze a particular part of the game, etc.
With regards to the map generator and editor... The file formats have already been reverse-engineered. People know how to do it. It would just make it a lot easier to 1) improve an existing tool rather than create a new one and 2) distribute said improved tool. Right now there are many tools that all have advantages and disadvantages, and probably aren't known to 85% of civ3 players. If there was a way to work on the official editor and feed improvements back into the official editor, things would be a lot better in this regard.
As far as I can tell, there's no downside to Firaxis/Infogrames to opening the source to the above pieces. They lose no sales, while fans get an improved product that is closer to what they want the game to do. Furthermore, when someone complains about the AI or the editor, Firaxis can just say: "We don't believe that's a priority. If you do, here's the FAQ on how to modify the editor. Good luck." I'm not a zealot who thinks this should all be open; clearly they need to make their money. But I just don't see revenue loss this way; quite possibly, this will even be a revenue gain because their product will be even better.
If you want to see how well this works, look at the Quake3 mod community. It's fantastic! The game's probably sold more as a result of their open attitude. And what about Half-Life? It wouldn't be half of what it is without the Counter-Strike mod. And the continuing work on Doom and Quake 1, games now well obsolete, but with thriving communities based on moving the games forward, and a whole lot of good will thrown id's way.
No doubt there are other candidates for opening, but the above are what came to mind. Clearly the base engine should remain closed (as the quake3 engine is). And it would take some effort to separate the pieces cleanly and allow for a more pluggable architecture. But it would pay off. For one thing, it would make it even easier for Firaxis to develop expansion packs in-house to have the code modularized better (no doubt the intent to open the quake3 game code led to design decisions that made the development of Quake 3's Team Arena much easier).
1) Artificial Intelligence - we've all seen AIs do stupid things
2) Map Generator - I've seen too many Pangaeas that aren't. And there need to be more parameters, like resource clustering/distribution factor, civs per continent, number of continents, and no doubt more.
3) Editor - Where to begin.... No zoomed out view. No adding of new units/civs/etc. Tools are still clunky to use. Selected/Cut/Copy/Paste not implemented.
Now, these seem to be ready candidates for having their source opened. Why? Well, none of these three are core civ3 parts. They all enhance the game, but are not really a part of the core engine. So nobody would gain from having the code for these pieces; it's not as though they could replicate civ3. And these parts are specialized for civ3, so they would most likely not be of much use elsewhere. And anyway, any competing games studio that tried to exploit the open source would get sued into oblivion. What would we gain? Well, if we had multiple independent AI routines available, the AIs wouldn't be so predictable. Some of them would operate from completely different code bases than others. I don't think Soren is likely to program an AI that does an all-out rush (builds ONLY cities and military units and tries to destroy everyone early), but it might be interesting to play against one (the Mongols, the Huns, etc....). The AI shows real growth from previously, but it still all came from the same minds as to what goals are important, how to analyze a particular part of the game, etc.
With regards to the map generator and editor... The file formats have already been reverse-engineered. People know how to do it. It would just make it a lot easier to 1) improve an existing tool rather than create a new one and 2) distribute said improved tool. Right now there are many tools that all have advantages and disadvantages, and probably aren't known to 85% of civ3 players. If there was a way to work on the official editor and feed improvements back into the official editor, things would be a lot better in this regard.
As far as I can tell, there's no downside to Firaxis/Infogrames to opening the source to the above pieces. They lose no sales, while fans get an improved product that is closer to what they want the game to do. Furthermore, when someone complains about the AI or the editor, Firaxis can just say: "We don't believe that's a priority. If you do, here's the FAQ on how to modify the editor. Good luck." I'm not a zealot who thinks this should all be open; clearly they need to make their money. But I just don't see revenue loss this way; quite possibly, this will even be a revenue gain because their product will be even better.
If you want to see how well this works, look at the Quake3 mod community. It's fantastic! The game's probably sold more as a result of their open attitude. And what about Half-Life? It wouldn't be half of what it is without the Counter-Strike mod. And the continuing work on Doom and Quake 1, games now well obsolete, but with thriving communities based on moving the games forward, and a whole lot of good will thrown id's way.
No doubt there are other candidates for opening, but the above are what came to mind. Clearly the base engine should remain closed (as the quake3 engine is). And it would take some effort to separate the pieces cleanly and allow for a more pluggable architecture. But it would pay off. For one thing, it would make it even easier for Firaxis to develop expansion packs in-house to have the code modularized better (no doubt the intent to open the quake3 game code led to design decisions that made the development of Quake 3's Team Arena much easier).
. Based off a popular language (personally, I want C/C++, and since that's what the game was written in, it's all that makes sense, but if they did it in another popular language I couldn't complain...), it'd make the mod-making process MUCH more interesting. As for the open-sourcing of the Editor and Map Generator, they're not personal proiorities, but it'd be cool if we had them. Still, don't think we're getting any of it -- if we even get the tools to make real scnerios anytime soon, I'll be thrilled. Also note that, for all of these, open sourcing really isn't required -- for the AI, a plugin or scripting archetcture that allowed the rewriting of individual functions would be enough, and for the map generator/editor, they could release a library that you could compile into another program and make an editor or mapmaker from scratch...
Sure the AI can be adjusted somewhat here and there, but frankly, the AI is really the very best part in Civ-3. Its substantially better then it ever was in Civ-2, SMAC, or CTP/CTP-2. One cant even compare. Its much, much better then I would have hoped for. 
.
Comment