3-D, Will it Ruin Civ3?

[UltraSonix]

Here we go again... How about this? I think the graphics should be good enough so that the terrain can be perceived to be three-dimentional. But otherwise the graphics should not be employing the Quake3 or Black and White engine or anything remotely like that. Those type of 3d just isn't civ.

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...
[This message has been edited by UltraSonix (edited June 13, 2000).]

[L o k i]

Oh so you want Civ to stay the same? Good ****ing one. That's a brilliant move. Not.

[L o k i]

http://www.e3awards.com/win.html

Check for the FOUR awards for Black and White. Most notably the LAST award for Black and White. I dare you to post what the catagory was for it.

Open your freakin eyes people, it's no wonder a lot of you are so addicted and drool over Civ2.
If I step back, the civs, haven't been THAT good. They were great, but not as good as people make it out to be. There just hasn't been a game developer to make a really really great game yet. Once they start coming in (as they are now), then you'll start to see the real power behind computer games.

[Tiberius]

Loki, I think you're missing something: we want a CIV game, not just a good strategy game. I'm sure Black and White is a great game, and probably Warkraft III will be great also, and many other strategy game will be great also.
BUT WE WANT CIV3.

[Joe Bourque]

That's right Loki, no woman alive can possibly understand the deep complexities of three dimensions. ::raises an eyebrow::

As for a word for only seeing what's right in front of you, you might be thinking of myopic.

And I think most folks here actually can see a wide variety of view points. They simply aren't myopiclly and fanatically fixated on making Civ3's graphics just like Black & Whites.

Cool it, eh? Everyone has their own opinion and folks aren't stupid or incapable of `getting it' if they think that the graphics used in games like Black & White aren't really appropriate for a turn based strategy game. Such a game would no doubt be quite entertaining, but it would not, by any stretch of the imagination, bear much resemblence to the mechanics and gameplay of the Civilization series; and if you give those up, you might as well be making an entirely different game, with no relation to Civ other then name.

Joe

[Imran Siddiqui]

Uh.. Loki... Civ2 is the best game EVER made, no ifs ands or buts about it (according to most here.. including me). The only thing that can beat it... you guessed it, Civ3!

Now, to the question. I liked SMAC's graphics. I want Civ3 to have a 3d map like SMACs (with trees and real mountains, etc.). I think that would be really cool. I thought Civ2's graphics were good as well, and I can't see us going back to Civ1's crap graphics with a flat map.

[OrangeSfwr]

We don't want a new Civ game, I think that's the major opinion of Apolytoners. We just want a few expansions. 3-d terrain is great for city views, but when it comes to the actual map I think it's agreed that the flat map with better graphics for terrain is most desirbale for Civ 3. I think to much 3-d will definitely ruin it, or at least make it a new game and not Civ.

Loki - God loves you

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~
"Oh, they have the Internet on computers now!"

[Par4]

Can the BW engine even handle something as grand as Civ?

------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse
HappyLand
There is no spoon,
But there is a knife

[Gameopolis]

WOW! 20 People posted some type of reply to this topic, its cool. I would like to Say that PUTDOWNS are very bad, when I was reading this I seen all Negative Comments the only POSITIVE Comment was by I think Hasdrubal as for everyone else I know the picture is UGLY Hasdrubal had the right ideas, fix it up. I think 3-D would make the game more interesting. Thanks for all your Construction Criticism Just everyone try to understanding that PUTTING DOWN Someone makes the person feel sad, you probably gotten some negative comments, why carry the problem and pass it to someone else?

------------------
GAMEOPOLIS

[L o k i]

Man, I am so utterly tired of this

Why can't you dumbasses pick it out? Why can't you read between my freakin lines?

You actualy THINK that by giving Civ3 a 3D world will totaly make it NOT civilization?

I'm gonna say this one more freakin time.

**A 3D WORLD IS CLOSER TO A GAME OF CIVILIZATION THAN A LIFELESS 2D MAP!**

READ IT! And for crying out loud, UNDERSTAND IT! It's not hard!

If Civilization 3 doesn't have an enourmous amount of graphical work, then it's just a Civ 2.5. Simple as that.

Gawd, CTP was a new game, but all it really had was a few extra playthings, you were all still basicaly doing the same old things. It's pointless carrying on the same way, because simply, it does get boring after a while.

Chess is not Civilization, get that between your eyes. Look up Civilization in the dictionary, its much more interesting than Chess. Is there even a game yet where you are actualy playing a true game of Civilization, where its NOT looking like a chess game? No, so how can any of you judge what hasn't happened yet?

Go and download Ground Control. Maybe then you'll start to 'feel' its importance.

[OrangeSfwr]

Loki - I thought you might like some ideas...
http://apolyton.net/forums/Forum23/H...tml?date=00:05

------------------
~~~I am who I am, who I am - but who am I?~~~
"Oh, they have the Internet on computers now!"

[Tiberius]

quote: If Civilization 3 doesn't have an enourmous amount of graphical work, then it's just a Civ 2.5. Simple as that.

That's simply wrong. It was NOT the graphics that made CIV one of the best game ever.

However I'm not totally against a 3D CIV, just want to be sure that to much 3D won't ruin it. And there are many other more important things which should be done to have a CIV3 not a 2.5. Take a look to the EC3 list, and you will see that graphics is not THAT important for civers.

[Urban Ranger]

Loki,

It seems that you are the one with the blinders.

Many people, such as Thubun and myself, have pointed out the sheer scale of Civ makes it impossible to have a 3D map. The highest mountain range is the Himalayas, with Mt. Everest at ~8900m. That' not bad, but if each square is 20 km wide, you ain't going to have any satisfactory 3D effect whatsoever. Most of the earth will be flat.

So you want to double (at least) the size of the graphic engine to see flat land?

[Par4]

Loki,
There's nothing between the lines, I see nothing but white

------------------
I use this email
(stupid cant use hotmail)
gamma_par4@hotmail.com
Don't ask for golf tips
Your game will get worse
HappyLand
There is no spoon,
But there is a knife

[UltraSonix]

The highest mountain range is the Himalayas, with Mt. Everest at ~8900m. That' not bad, but if each square is 20 km wide, you ain't going to have any satisfactory 3D effect whatsoever.

Urban Ranger - you've said it all! 3d Civ3 doesn't work!

------------------
No, in Australia we don't live with kangaroos and koalas in our backyards...