Could Civilization become a online-blockbuster?

[Grumbold]

Originally posted by Oligarf
You don't have to explain that. But that fact offers a new aspect, important in the real world, called time. I can fight several wars at once in CIV not having to bother about time. In real life that's not the case.

No, but as President you can appoint Generals to run each theatre of operations. Thats where TBS and RTS part the ways. In TBS you can play President, Chancellor, Admirals of the Pacific and Atlantic fleets, Generals of the Pacific, Western and African theatres simultaneously. In RTS you can only be one of those things at a time and the artificial game skill is in knowing which one of them most needs your attention at any given moment.

In games where your own side has no AI to speak of and you have to run everything personally TBS produces more sensible results than RTS. Now if MOO3 lived up to its early promises of having AI's run things while you decided where to spend IFP's to interfere and take personal control, we might be seeing a new evolutionary step in defining the level of personal control you can exert in a game.

[Oligarf]

In my opinion the growth of and prospering of a civilization is for a part dependent on the people that live in that civilization. It's maybe a slightly other discussion but in Civilization several entities are fighting each other, I never have the feeling that millions of people are battling. Yes, I think it would be wonderful to assign generals, ministers, professors and so on. That you are really dependent on how you educate your people, how much you allow free science. To increase the impact of the Golden Age with genius Generals, brilliant Scientist. But maybe that not what is ment with Civ, I hope it will be so someday.

[dervish]

I voted for turn-based.
I don't see how a real-time strategy could fit a blocbuster category. May be, because, turn-based is associated with such serious games like chess, where you have to think so much, that your brains start aching. And real-time is associated with childish games with animation and colourful images.
Even if you make Civ3 black and white and void of animations I wouldn't mind playing it again and again.

[HazieDaVampire]

any of yous think you should get a 3rd map option?
option 1: Terrortory
option 2: Land scape
option 3: Unit placement
would save us from spending 30 mins trying see if we have any units in babylons terrortory before we declare war on them! Would also decrease turn times.

[Oligarf]

A little revival all of a sudden of this thread apparently:
Dervish:
Don't know, C&C, AOE, not that bad I think. But you have a point with chess etc.
HazieDaVampire:
Could you explain what you are saying there?

And about the voting till now 50% thinks that Civ could become an online blockbuster and 50% thinks that rts could help, but those groups are both divided, interesting...

[HazieDaVampire]

you know in the mini map on the botton left of the screen, you have two veiwing options, Terrortory is default, and you can press that button so it turns into terrain veiw, well they should add a veiw that tells you where all of the veiwable units are. So you don't spend a while trying to see if you have a unit in sombodys terrortory (so that nobody gets pissed at you declaring war while you have units in the enemys terrortory). It'll just speed things up, and let you see an entire front line and stuff like that.

[Oligarf]

understood

[Paalikles]

Just a thought though:

What about using passwords n stuff for the all mp-games in civ3
then you could schedule your games, and take a break to do other stuff (like go to work )
I suppose password/save will be available for civ-per-email games...but why not take this an implement it in PTW as an option?
however - that's just my two cents worth

edit:
oh - I voted civ=tbs - because I believe civ as rts is impossible, and civ as rts will ruin the concept of civ. errr....something like that

tbs on the internet will take up hours and hours - as sp does today - not all civ fans will be able to be online for hours and hours every day...thus saving and passwording will be a neat feuture for mp-games

"Like a mighty castle, our friendship will survive. Even though the very heavens rain...err..big rocks down upon it"

[HazieDaVampire]

well, what do you think of my idea?

[Oligarf]

HazieDaVampire:
It would be a nice feature for the game in general, also for the SP, it could help MP.
Paalikles:
TBS will take an enormous amount of hours, we have talked here about permanent running games where people could log in and out. A password system could mean something for such a game. The computer could take over when someone leaves for work or school.

Does someone know if there is some news about the MP of Civ III Firaxis will release?

[HazieDaVampire]

it really would be sweet to have an on-going game, but i bet people will more than likley attack you when your not there. I think on-line scenarios will be more of a success on-line, cuz you'll already be in the age, and they'll be shorter, things like WW2. WW2 is probubly going to be them most popular with so meny civilisations involved!
Like Axis:
Germany
Italy
Japan
+ Anybody who desides not to go with histroy
and Allies
England
France (France officialy turned Axis and owned half its country still, but had lots of resistance).
Holland (i think)
Norway (Not sure)
Russia (But i bet sombody playing as Russia desides to go Axis).
China (kinda allied, they're enemys of Japan, and are friendly towards America)
America (only joined the war when the tide began to turn, but if the German player showers America with goodies, the American players probubly gunna pull back on declaring war).

This also brings me to another off topic subject, anybody think we need a Nazi style government option? (i'll start a new thread about it!).

[HazieDaVampire]

oh, and the large countrys should be played by either low skilled players, or by more dedicated players (Sombody who won't screw about and mess things up)! And smaller countrys should be played by more skilled players (They want a challenge don't they!).

[Oligarf]

Important for scenarios is, how to fill them. Every scenario will have one or two favourite civs and how to fill the rest is a question, so I don't know if that will help.

[Paalikles]

In a wwii scenario - it will be difficult to find some way to add resistance-movements in the countries occupied by Germany
BTW - Norway was occupied by Germany, but was initially "neutral".
A ww2 scenario - built to make turns count as months/weeks or days will be interesting - and if possible, one could include as much as 24 civs (on a huge map...) and have the most impressive MP game ever!
(Though I find it hard to belive that ANYONE would manage to make such a game...)

My thoughts on the map issue: good idea - though not entirely related to this thread

My thoughts on civ becoming a blockbuster:
Provided that the short types of games end up working as described (like Regicide etc) - these games will hopefully be filled with enough action to attract civgamers.
MP through a LAN network or similar - will make room for longer games - which may probably go on for days for that matter

What I do believe people are worrying about:
*Speed problems (connection)
->hopefully there will be a server fast enough to cope with PTW
*Time spent on a single mp-game
->Will probably vary with the different game-types

I'd say Civ3 has the potential to become a great mp-game

[Oligarf]

I totaly agree with you Paalikles, therefor I feel very sorry that fans of the game are not always that enthusiastic about this idea.