Historical or fantasy CIV3

[Tiberius]

Reading some posts around here, I started thinking about the following question:
What do you, Apolytoners, want more:
1. a historically true CIV3 (where events follow the timeline of history exactly as it was in reality)
or
2. a CIV3 in which there's much more place for imagination, fantasies and new ideas (even if they didn't happen this way in the history of mankind) (just a few ideas: new goverment forms, amazing discoveries, other religions, different military units, aliens, nations specializing themselves in magic, and so on).
So, could our history look diferrent ?

[Atahualpa]

From the points you provide I take: HISTORICAL!
Magic really has nothing to do in a Civ game! But I am not objected to fantasy when it sticks to being realistic, meaning it could have happened on our good ol' earth. And magic definetly is not realistic!
But anyway, I would prefer historical.

ATa

[MidKnight Lament]

Yeah, until you got to the magic bit, I may have gone with the second option. We certainly don't want to stick with history point by point, but magic is going a bit far. Other things can be added, but only as long as they stay true to how history could have turned out, and I don't believe magic is a part of that. Other governments or religions... sure.

- MKL

[Adm.Naismith]

To be honest, I hope Firaxis will be able to build a very good "Civ Engine" core, that can be wrapped with different discovery tree, units, maps good enough to fit a quite wide freedom on game background. It can't be a Jack-of-all (because it will stretch too much the original concept) but surely can left enough room for MOD and Scenery.

OTOH, I like a realistic mainline to follow during my Civ games, only not so pre-defined to force me to very few choices.

By example, if slavery will be implemented in Civ III, I will like to have in the model same needs, pros and cons that drived past king / goverment into the choice (slavery yes / slavery no), but not to be forced on the same historically correct path.

May I develop my Civ without the need of eternal wars? May I develop the country without the need of a big-cities centric urban approach? May I drive the industrialization progress on a better sustainable model (more "green") and help other Civ to do the same? May I push my population on a more decisive effort on the space race or I'll drain too much global resources on the try? Must I rescue the Earth or should I bet all my coins on space and other planets colonies (the Moon, Mars, Alpha Centauri).

A good Civ simulator will let us push a bit the boundaries of a realistically set "world limit".

Magic? Not in the Earth scenario, please!
Genetic manipulation? Yes, if your population will accept it (counting social agenda, culture, religion, etc.).

------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant

[Steve Clark]

For me, definitely historical, I hate anything to do with scifi and fanstasy. HOWEVER, it has been my assumption that Civ3 will mirror Civ2 in that it will provide a historical timeline for regular gameplay, with the ability to customize files, events and graphics to create any type of scenarios one desires. I truly wish a regular game of Civ3 would end in very early 2000 so I wouldn't be subjected to scifi nonsense. And if someone wants to create a MOM or MOO type scenario, all the power to that person, just don't include any of that stuff in my regular game. Did I make my point? Just one person's viewpoint, that's all.

[Tiberius]

Well, maybe the magic thing was a little bit exagerated; think it like a specialization in some kind of strange religion, or something like that.
Anyway, the question remains the same: reality or imagination?

[Andz83]

I'd prefer the historical correct variant.

But it should also be possible to choose between the two ways of playing.

And maybe there should be a way to work with magic. The best way to manage this is to work with infinite resource slots, so that you can put in new resources like mana etc.

What do you think about that?

[Par4]

I've always seen Civ as a recreation of history using human events as a guide. It would be a semi simulation as you retrace the steps of humanity technologically while creating your empire that changes history. Civ is clearly a combo of the both as you simulate your tribe turning into a civilization and massive empire but you can't get industrial revolution techs in BC,(thing I saw on history channel) a roman in alexandria had all the parts of a steam train drawn up, just not in a train, there is a chance someone else could have created a train from the parts and then romans, amazed by the train, started a roman industrial revolution, get guns, defeat the barbarians, never fall. This can't happen in Civ so on that sense it is historical but you can make your civ as successful as you want so it is a remake of history in that sense instead of a retrace.

------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse

[Urban Ranger]

I would say history would just serve as a broad backdrop for Civ, as we are not recreating history, but making history.

I agree that Firaxis needs to build an exceptional engine, so mods and such can be written for it. Take a look at Quake to see what a good game engine can do for gamers and the company.

[Napoleon I]

There should definitely be a very strong and efficient historical engine to support civ3. Of course Firaxis should give us space to define new historical pathways but I think that having magic would be going a bit too far into the fantasy land. If there is a way that you can develop a technology called trickery or something, I'd accept it (after all Columbus did trick the Indians with the solar eclipse), but I don't think we should go into the spells area.

------------------
Napoleon I

[Andz83]

Hey, what about my propose?

Surely, there should be an engine but why not let the player decide whether he wants a hstorical game or a "classic" game where history is made by himself?

[BeeBee]

Replaying history of mankind is what civ-games are about. So realism is very important for me. There are already enough of those fantasy games.

------------------
C'est dur etre bébé

[OrangeSfwr]

I'm with Beebee. "Give me history or give me..."eh...nevermind

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~

[Par4]

quote: Originally posted by OrangeSfwr on 05-23-2000 09:32 PM I'm with Beebee. "Give me history or give me..."eh...nevermind

Ok everyone take your guesses, what was Orange going to say,

Give me history or give me a grilled cheddar cheese sandwhich with butter grilled into the bread and some milk on a cold winter morning.

Of course he could have always said death, but we don't want to turn Firaxis into a bunch of executioners do we ?

We need guesses here people, anyone who looks at this thread reply and take your guess, this forum could use a few carnival esque games every once in a while.

------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse

[Grier]

I am sure that he was about to say

"Give me history or give me fantasy as I realy dont care either way".

alternativly he could have been about to say

"Give me history or give a copy of CTP2".