What's wrong with you people?!?

[Roman]

I totally agree with Ralf. Firaxis itself has stated that optional civ II level graphics will also be awailable, but the default grafics will be animated, etc. Hence graphics should not be problematic for anybody.

As to attempts to turn Civ III into a 3D game, I cannot picture how it could possibly work. I hope no multi-layered globes are implemented, since it would simply be too confusing to play on them. I cannot imagine trying to find a submarine by rotating a globe and switching between various undersea layers at the same time. The current map system should be kept, though there ought to be a greater variety of terrain types.

[CapTVK]

quote: Originally posted by Snapcase on Snapcase on 01-27-2001 09:00 AM You all live in the 20th century, dudes. A game released without good graphics in late 2002 will be the laughing stock of the market. I for one would not buy it.

So that's why everybody is laughing when I play chess!

[Sirotnikov]

I think it is extremely silly to have animated units and terrain.

Animated terrain simply wastes and possibly hogs computer resources while adding mainly eye strain and perhaps some entertaining for the "simple" people .

Animated units? Since when do in Civ my elephant actually walks? Since when do I actually have an elephant instead of a generic unit representing a standard battalion of elephants in a size suited for taking on other units' battalions? Remember, in Civ I we had a square representing a unit and a square representing a city and were just fine!

Why do we have to strive for the great looks of a RTS game? This simplifies and stupidifies things, as concepts of a civ-like TBS game are stripped out of the game and abused. Soon there would come a fool that would say he won't play chess unless the units are similar to the actual things they represent. He will claim that it's year 2001 and chess should modernize to meet the standarts. Would that make that man right? No.

I'm not of the people who claim they could play civ if it were text-driven. I wouldn't. But I would be able to play it with squares and circles instead of citis and units. Remember where civ comes from - the strategical map or board with symbolic units on it.

This method has been used by strategists for centuries. I'm sure that if they would show each and every unit for what it actually was, it would only give the strategists a head-ache.

And we all know all the nice effects are turned off to speed up game, free computer resources and improve visibility.

[EnochF]

I don't have any problem with animated units.

But animated terrain, animated "special resources," and unnecessary animation in the City View or in the user interface will probably just piss me off. What a waste. And for what?

[wittlich]

EnochF, in other words: Too much of a good thing gone bad? I understand

[Chronus]

Hey, I have an idea ...

Instead of the usual units ... let's have X's and O's just like in Tic Tac Toe! The human player can be the X's and the PC can be the O's. Of course, the O's will be different colors to represent the different civs ... ;-)

[- Groucho -]

Don't take offence, but a lot of this thread sounds like knee-jerk anti-RTS reactions. Movement and improved graphics are a good thing if they lead to a cleaner interface with better information density that doesn't slow down the game.

There is nothing wrong with unit animations as long as they don't needlessly slow down the game. We've got movement animation now (incredibly bad clunky animation). All unit animations mean is that your settler will walk along the route you've chosen instead of bump along like some South Park character. As long as I can speed up how long it takes him/her to get there, I'll be happy no matter if s/he walks, dances or cartwheels down the path.

Combat animation is a slightly different story - I don't mind if (a) it gives me some information and (b) once I've figured out that info I can turn it off if I want. I think most people probably go with fast combat resolution in SMAC after a few games merely because the only information that can be gleaned from watching the combat is how much damage one unit can do to the other (which allows you to do a rough calculation as to how many units you should throw at the enemy next turn). Since that info is basically available from the terrain and the other unit's icon and morale flag, after a while combat is not worth watching.

As for terrain/city animation, I agree that eye-candy like bubbling volcanoes, or pounding surf would just be a needless distraction (the screens are bad enough when you've got thirty units moving through a heavily populated area). But there is nothing wrong with terrain animation that conveys information. Anything that reduces the number of pop-ups is good with me. For example, a long series of WLT_D windows in CivII can be avoided with just having the city flash briefly and have some icon float above it (a waving flag, a crown, whatever).

The best reason to have movement on the map is that there is only so much info you can pack into shape and colour before the map starts looking like something by Jackson Pollock. A little movement to convey info, if it keeps the interface clean, is not a bad thing.

Of course, the worst case scenario is if CivIII comes out looking like Heroes of Might and Magic (is that the name?) - you know - the game with the cheesy cartoon scenery, the horrid faux opera sound track, and the bubbling volcanoes and pounding surf ... Uggh.

------------------
Echinda
"That which does not kill you ... will likely try harder the next time."

[Vrank Prins]

quote: Originally posted by Ralf on 01-28-2001 03:21 PMWhat im aiming at here is foolish ideas about Populous-style 3D globe-maps; maps with several 3D map-layers on top of each other (allowing u-boats passing "underneath" surface-ships, and so on?

I didn't know such a thing is possible. But I for one would love it. It would also give you the opportunity, or it could be made possible then, that ground and air units, and subs and "ups" of opponent CIV's could pass eachother in the same tile without having to attack one another. You just could head straight to your real target by the shortest way.

And I think my new 800mhz athlon processor with 32mb graphicscard would handle things quite well.

[fluxcapacitor]

repeptitive? Been watching Jorge W. B. speeches a bit much lately?

---AND just so y'all know: I am not a Democrat poking fun. I voted for Bush. But he couldn't talk his way outtava paper bag.

[Grumbold]

Excellent graphics are not the number one priority of Apolyton readers because we are almost all dyed in the wool Civ fans who have been playing these games for years. For Firaxis, who will hope to attract entirely new gamers to the genre, they are more essential. Some players will be drawn in by a good looking game that gets good reviews (where look can be as important as feel) and only subsequently be hooked by the quality of the gameplay. If gameplay was the only important aspect then chessboards would still be outselling game consoles.

The game absolutrely must convey its key information to the player crisply, cleanly and quickly. How much additional eye-candy they can add on to to make the information more pleasant and less repetitious is up to their ingenuity. If the same guys are responsible for AI and graphics it will be amazing. While the AI guru's are doing the vital job of making the game play brilliantly, I hope the graphics wizards will be adding in all the subtle touches like empire history replays, palace construction and city views. They don't matter a fig in timed turn multiplayer matches but all help generate broad and lasting appeal in a way that a bare bones boardgame never could.

[TacticalGrace]

animated units make it a whole lot harder not just for the development team but also people writing mods which ususally requires the creation of new units.

going for high-res graphics is a good idea though. This adds memory load but machine capacity has improved somewhat since civ2 (a factor of 4 at least). The job of the artist making the unit graphic is possibly made easier though - one of the tricks use to be getting a recognisable image in those limited number of pixels.

[down th' pub]

I have to agree with Echina on this, as much as I hate to say it, but the unit/combat animation/model from CTP(2) is nice & pretty!

You can keep everything else except the Wonder Movies.
('cos I'm probably the only one who liked the High Council and Heralds)

[Imran Siddiqui]

quote: Excellent graphics are not the number one priority of Apolyton readers because we are almost all dyed in the wool Civ fans who have been playing these games for years. For Firaxis, who will hope to attract entirely new gamers to the genre, they are more essential. Some players will be drawn in by a good looking game that gets good reviews (where look can be as important as feel) and only subsequently be hooked by the quality of the gameplay. If gameplay was the only important aspect then chessboards would still be outselling game consoles.

EXACTLY! This is why Sid Meier's Gettyburg and Close Combat series (which are good games in their own right) blow away the sales of The Operational Art of War (which is probably the best wargame ever). Games with somewhat nice graphics (don't always have to be top of the line) will attract some people. Most people that are new to a genre might look at a game with good reviews, see the obsolete graphics and say "Pass". If you don't upgrade the graphics, all you get are the grognards buying the game and the company loses money and doesn't make much more of the game.

[Vrank Prins]

quote: Originally posted by down th' pub on 01-31-2001 02:25 PM I have to agree with Echina on this, as much as I hate to say it, but the unit/combat animation/model from CTP(2) is nice & pretty!

And I do like that feature too !.
Though, after having played CTP a few evenings, I've turned off the animated units for good. They're terribly slowing things down and it is just to boring to keep watching them "lumbering" around all the time (in dutch that would be "sjokken" but the ethymological english equivalent for that is "jogging"). I wouldn't mind if CIV-III had this feature as long as you can turn it off !!!!!

[Grumbold]

They have confirmed that the game will support unanimated units for mod-makers so it would be surprising if their own animations could not be switched off.

Perhaps for the real grognards they will support flat maps and standard military symbols on the counters. Look! Its an oval-in-square 8-6-4. It must be the 1st Armoured Division
[This message has been edited by Grumbold (edited February 02, 2001).]