Tweet
Does the failure of civ III show Brian reynolds is the true genius of civgame design?
Brian left the Civ III project at an early stage. He is regarded as the real brains behind CivII. Civ II is a classic. Civ III isn't. But Civ I is a classic too!
I think the answer is obvious
I think the answer is obvious
-
100Brian! Brian! Brian!35.00%35Sid! Sid! Sid!18.00%18Don't know but we love you Horsie9.00%9Waiter, there's a banana in my soup38.00%38Last edited by Alexander's Horse; April 2, 2002, 21:12.Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..
Look, I just don't anymore, okay? -
I gather you haven't actually played the board game. Cause the resemblance mostly ends with the name.
Civilization the first IS a classic. Sid did that. He didn't base it on the board game. He claims he didn't even play it till after he finished the game. Based on the game he produced its certainly possible he only heard about it.
It wasn't even an Avalon Hill game to begin with. It was a Brittish game. If you ever saw the mess Avalon Hill produced when they tried to make a civ game you consider Sid the greatest genius in history. It was called Incanabula and was nearly as buggy as Battle Cruiser Millenium 2000. Before Derek Smart fixed it.
Brian did a great job with Civ II. Sid did a great job with Civ I. Civ III is pretty good but neither of those two did much work on it. Brian however did a great job of wrecking the start on it. I understand not wanting to work on something you don't have your heart in but the fact is he wrecked many months of work when he left. -
brian brian brian
i cant wait for Brian Reynolds' Civilization 4."I've lived too long with pain. I won't know who I am without it. We have to leave this place, I am almost happy here."
- Ender, from Ender's Game by Orson Scott CardComment
-
Ethelred - thanks for the clarification - I took out the board game troll. I don't want it distracting from the topic.Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..
Look, I just don't anymore, okay?Comment
-
Re: Does the failure of civ III show Brian reynolds is the true genius of civgame design?
yetOriginally posted by Alexander's Horse
Civ III isn't.
how long does it take for a game to become a classic?
surely more than 5 months
I don't know the story, so perhaps I am off base, but I have little respect for someone who is the lead designer on a program and leaves halfway through its completion, causing the whole thing to go back to the drawing board. So while I loved Civ2 and enjoyed Smax, I have to vote for sid, because, after all civ2 was just a rehashed civ with new graphics and some new units.Comment
-
There is no Dana, only Zuul.
DanDan Magaha
Firaxis Games, Inc.
--------------------------Comment
-
Don't worship Brian Reynolds as some sort of gaming god, you'll only be disapointed.Comment
-
So, Dan, do you honestly think Civ III is up there with Civ I and II?Originally posted by Dan Magaha FIRAXIS
There is no Dana, only Zuul.
Dan
(I'd like an honest answer please)Any views I may express here are personal and certainly do not in any way reflect the views of my employer. Tis the rising of the moon..
Look, I just don't anymore, okay?Comment
-
especially when the AOE knock off comes out.Originally posted by Sandman
Don't worship Brian Reynolds as some sort of gaming god, you'll only be disapointed.Comment
-
where the fudge did dan magaha come from? i thought he started hiding when i ranted about multiplayer? where'd he go...
.... mumbles about sombrero ..."I've lived too long with pain. I won't know who I am without it. We have to leave this place, I am almost happy here."
- Ender, from Ender's Game by Orson Scott CardComment
-
Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
So, Dan, do you honestly think Civ III is up there with Civ I and II?
(I'd like an honest answer please)
Senator Horsie, it depends on what your definition of "is" is.Dan Magaha
Firaxis Games, Inc.
--------------------------Comment
-
Fascinating thread, BTW. So far the IQ (Ignore Quotient) of the thread is just just under 20%. If it heats up tomorrow I'll bet it tops 60%...
DanDan Magaha
Firaxis Games, Inc.
--------------------------Comment
-
Lol Dan
Civ 3 (still) has a rushed, incomplete feel to it.
And who had a major impact on the Civ 3 development project?
brian brian brian
Perhaps once its finished (scenarios, editor, maybe even a little thing called multiplayer), Civ 3 will rank up there with Civ 2.I'm building a wagon! On some other part of the internets, obviously (but not that other site).Comment
-
Dan,
personally I think the game is great except for 2 major problems: AI tech trading and ridiculous pollution levels (everything else I can live with or work around in a mod). I've put off playing more til 1.18 comes out, do you know when they'll be making any announcements on when it might come out?
Thanks.Comment
-
Hmmm, wasn't Reynolds a game designer? The only game design issue I have is that corruption is supposed to encourage very small Empires but makes large empires almost pointless. Only reason in CIV 3 to have a large empire is culture and citys rarely flip so far from your capital, so I'm paying upkeep for temples in cities that I had to rush them in the first place with the only benefit being "points" towards a cultural victory.
Would Reynolds have gotten a Better AI? Multi-player? A nice editor for designing our own stuff? Longer Beta test?
Bottom line, someone somewhere with a PDA and a pager said they wanted the game done by Tueday. and when the programs asked if they wanted it good or if they wanted it Tuesday, the suit replied that they wanted it Tuesday.
I find the game enjoyable, and see the signs of hardwork everywhere. Could they do a better job with 8 more months? I'm sure they could. Will that game get released? It might. Could Reynolds have gotten an 8 month extension? I have no reason to think he could.
RikComment
Comment