4000 BC to 2020 AD, is that to short?

[bertje121]

Civ III will probably be played from 4000 BC to 2020 AD. I think that's to short. It also means there won't be any future techs.
What do you guys think about this?

[Lord_Davinator]

I thought it would be a bit longer than that.


There are a few future technologies in the game, most of which are there cause someday we will have them... it adds a more realistic feature to the game and doesn't turn it into a sci-fi boggle like ctp1.

For me(I want historc accuracy to the game) I think its a good thing to do. Hopefully the game will be good enough so that we don't have a pile of fut. tech by the end of the game.

BTW any one thought of what they'll put in instead of the fut. tech? making it more usefull than they were in civ2 in terms of affecting the game??

[Ralf]

Its a very good thing that Firaxis decided to skip future techs & units in the main game.

On the other hand; it is also very likely that they will either bundle the main game or a scenario-pack, with some really nice futuristic scenarios, with all the future-style techs and units that you can possibly ask for. Everybody, incluiding SciFi-fans, wins by Firaxis decision to cut-out the SciFi-stuff from the main game.

Lets say the main game comes with 110+ techs and 75+ units. Thanks to the fact that they wisely decided to furnish only 4000 BC - 2020 AD; the main game will become much more enriched & ample. Also, any Sci-Fi scenario-creators can more easily start their work from a clean sheet, without having already existing main game SciFi-techs and units to worry about. There will pretty quickly be futuristic mod-packs available for download - available to every SciFi-scenario creator out there.

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited April 22, 2001).]

[MrFun]

Hopefully, they won't allow too many years to pass for each turn.

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by MrFun on 04-22-2001 11:27 AM Hopefully, they won't allow too many years to pass for each turn.

I woudnt mind if they raised the total ammount of game-turns from 500 (in SMAC, I believe) to, lets say 600 turns.

[SerapisIV]

Going on the assumption that culture has significant importance in CivIII, I think that the future techs will give increased culture ratings, which would also increase score. I can't think of any other usefulness of future techs, but score and culture.

I also think that although the future tech/sci-fi should not be included in the main game that the game should have extra turns. Of course this could be done by just making 1750-1850 be 1-year turns instead of 2-year turns and similar type moves. The assigning of game years is arbitrary anyway, designed only to give a kind of epic feel and rel-world correlation to the game. It's the number of turns that actually matters, so why not bump that number up.

[me_irate]

I seem to remember a long time ago when sid first decided to make civ 3. He was planning on making ac2 and civ3 and some game to put them together. It seems to me that leaving off at 2020 and not having a spaceship, he will then make his next game from 2020-whenever and make it finish with the lauch to alpha centauri. It could even be an expansion with maybe 200-300 more years that would be added to the end of Civ 3.

[Ilkuul]

quote: Originally posted by Ralf on 04-22-2001 09:31 AM Its a very good thing that Firaxis decided to skip future techs & units in the main game.

They did!? Where/when/by whom was this stated?

[Ilkuul]

quote: Originally posted by me_irate on 04-22-2001 05:24 PM ...not having a spaceship...

No spaceship either?! You guys are wrecking my whole concept of Civ3. Where does that piece of info come from? Yes, I'd gathered that the ending was not going to be AC exactly as in Civ3... but to me that didn't necessarily imply no spaceship. I love my spaceships!

[Lawrence of Arabia]

I dont think Civ3 should go too far in the future. Maybe have one futuristic advance for Land/Sea/air and one tech advance for economics/mathematics/scicen but not anything more.

------------------
Its okay to smile; you're in America now

[Cyclotron]

I think 4000 to 2020 is too short...

...But only if it uses Civ2 style time passage. I think there should be many more turns in Civ3, so I advocate a quarterly or even monthly system. More turns are needed, but 4000 and 2020 are good limits... so we just need more turns!

About future technologies: Been there, done that, it sucked

------------------
- Cyclotron7, "that supplementary resource fanatic"

[Jer8m8]

It's a great idea; I agree
It's also not new

People have suggested, yes future techs, prehistoric techs (ex. agriculture), and shorter turns. I myself suggested you start as a nomadic tribe (1 unit) that moves, does not keep explored knowledge, and has to research city-building.

[Adm.Naismith]

quote: Originally posted by Ilkuul on 04-22-2001 08:14 PM No spaceship either?! You guys are wrecking my whole concept of Civ3. Where does that piece of info come from? Yes, I'd gathered that the ending was not going to be AC exactly as in Civ3... but to me that didn't necessarily imply no spaceship. I love my spaceships!

Hmmm, AFAIK the Spaceship seems will be keept, at least for continuity and link to the previus Civ episodes.

Of course it's totally unrealistic to have mankind in 2020AD ready to send a starship to Alpha Centauri; probably until then we won't go to Mars, for that matters.

This is still a case were I vote to keep a Great Dream over more realistic "inside Solar System" game target.

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

[schubert37]

There could be an expansion set. I'm thinking of something like Civ ToT, that wasn't that bad after all. The graphics were bad, o.K., but I loved the idea of an extended original play.

[Ralf]

quote: Originally posted by Ilkuul on 04-22-2001 08:10 PM They did!? Where/when/by whom was this stated?

Click on this Apolyton-link: Interview with Sid
The original Gamespot.UK link is: Sid Meier on Civilization III

[This message has been edited by Ralf (edited April 23, 2001).]