Check this Out http://www.pcgameplay.co.uk/home.htm

[The diplomat]

I agree about the advisors.
Keep the heads, they are really cool, but make it more obvious as to who they represent. I would hate to click on one advisor only to get another one, because I confused the military advisor for the diplomacy advisor!

------------------
No permanent enemies, no permanent friends.
[This message has been edited by The diplomat (edited April 26, 2001).]

[airdrik]

One thing I just noticed, is that instead of having one set picture per terrain, they have 4-5 pictures per terrain+2-3 different border styles between each terrain. They have 4 different bottom-layer terrains: grass/wet, plains/temperate, desert/dry, and tundra/cold, then they add other terrains on top of it. And is that raised terrain right beside the small world map?

I would just like to take this moment to say thanks to PC Gameplay for posting such a revealing screen shot.

I agree that the advisors should be symbols rather than heads. And as for the colored circles, perhaps you could just replace those circles with falg designs.

[ChrisShaffer]

7 heads == 7 players? Perhaps not advisors at all. None of those heads looks like the Sid science advisor head.

[airdrik]

Actually, I think you're right. Though they should add like a colored background/flag to them so that you know which one is which.

[Hundred Waters]

Sid is on the far right.
Can someone in the UK run out and get the issue?
Pretty please with sugar on top***

[Guest]

I'm sorry to say this but I don't like at all what I see. The irrigation and trees/bushes are ugly, cities look to me like some sort of armor units and in whole the game tiles are too squarish to my taste. I don't like the colours either; e.g. the grassland & sea has too much yellow mixed in. I must say that I was shocked when I with great expectations downloaded the 1. screenshot. I could hardly believe my eyes. I'm having hard time to say anything good about that screenshot. Only thing I like are the mountains with a river flowing down on them.

Okay, okay: gameplay & good AI etc. are the most important things in strategy games but still, this game is being published at 2000 century! My last sentence might sound like a blasphemy to some of you but to be honest I must say it: I really can't say that Civ3's graphics are any better than CTP1's. No offence intented to anyone. I'm just sad and disappointed. I really had so high expectations on this game.
[This message has been edited by Marko Polo (edited April 26, 2001).]

[Ilkuul]

Great to see these screenshots. The green sea is fine by me - makes me think of tropical beaches!

I must say I don't like the heads - I prefer Fintilgin's suggestion of crossed swords, coins, etc. Much clearer, and adds a touch of serious purpose to the game. The symbol represents the office, which happens to be held by a particular person. We wouldn't be too happy to receive a letter from the Treasury whose letterhead consisted of a photo of the current incumbent! That would reek of hubris. The office, represented by the symbol, is more enduring than the holder. In Civ2, though the face remains the same - a pleasant fiction to match the fact that the ruler remains the same over 60 centuries! - the costumes change, representing changing times. I'd like to see that continued in Civ3.

I guess the 2 unmarked buttons at the bottom are for functions yet to be decided... If the selected unit is a settler, there should be plenty of functions to choose from!

I like the look of the mini-map window; but isn't it rather small in comparison with the rest of the screen? Seems you'd be hard put to see the location of cities on something that size. Maybe it can be enlarged? That would be cool.

I disagree with airdrik that the cities look like piles of rubble! If you look at them at a larger resolution (or print the pic out to fill a sheet of paper), you'll see clearly that they consist of a series of single-storey buildings around a central circle (marketplace? forum?) - which presumably is the appropriate style for size 2 cities in 120 AD. I must say, tho', that I would have preferred more colour - they look rather drab. But maybe that's still to come...

It's noteworthy that both the Americans and the Aztecs have the same style of city: does that mean civ-specific city styles are out? A pity if so.

I can only assume there's a lot still to be tweaked, e.g. the font in which the city names appear. These are almost unreadable, even on the large printout I have in front of me.

But these are minor points: overall this looks really good - keep it up, Firaxis! (I specially like the mountains!)

[Ceci n'est pas Snapcase]

Ug-lee, very placeholderish, but at least we can see a bit more of the interface here. Ugly map/unit
windows, I must say, but other than that very nicely scaled back. I like the command buttons. The
"Standing Unit" under St.Louis is probably the tall dark shape in the old Baltimore screenshot; what the
hell is it? Nice-looking advisors, and some interesting units...

[Gramphos]

In lower left corner:

Settlers

Regular

0.0.1/1

Sea

Does this mean that Settlers can walk on water?
[This message has been edited by vgriph (edited April 26, 2001).]

[Kaak]

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR............if i wanted to play ctp, or a game with that type of visual interphase, that's what i'd play. I PLAY CIV2 AND I LIKE THAT INTERPHASE. this sucks. I am VERY VERY DISAPPOINTED

[MarBaS]

These screen shots remind me alot of CTP. Im sure the game does not play like it but when i look at them it sure seems like it. Im definatley not impressed with what i see from them. PCGamer is haveing there own Civ3 preview and they usually got some pretty good ones so we should see some good screenshots from there.
[This message has been edited by MarBaS (edited April 26, 2001).]

[MarkG]

the map thumbnail is very ctp-ish

the way the cities appear though and the borders are "copy-paste" from smac, as well the resolution of the units(this last one being pretty bad)...


BUT they are EARLY screenshots, so lets not rush into any final judgements

[EnochF]

I'm willing to accept borders exactly as they appeared in SMAC. It was a good system. And it looks as if the expanded diplomacy system is going to make better use of them, as far as international relations are concerned, than SMAC ever could have.

[VetLegion]

Seems like borders are from SMAC. Probably quite some more things are to.

map seems a little blurry probably jpg helped that. Units have those circles filled with color... I really find that ugly. Shields are better, or not - filled circles.

It seems to me with every new screenshot and piece of info we get that firaxis was quite conservative in all approaches to the game and left quite much for us alternative projects to do

I quite like the huge multitile mountain.

[Sirotnikov]

Haven't any of you read the interview in Gamespot UK?

It said something like: "we are constantly playing the game. we have a SMAC engine with Civilization type graphics modification and some rule changes. Nothing will be built for real until we decided upon it.

And this really looks like SMAC with a mod... some controls are changed, but hey, they're firaxis, they can design mods that way.

I hope I'm right in this way. I could be right in another one. This really is a SMAC ripoff only that is what they're going to sell. Knowing Sid's perfectionsim I find that hard to believe, but only he knows....

Sid? Dan Magha? Someone? Can you please put our minds at rest?