Tweet
Firaxis, leave the graphics as they are! They are definitely good enough as they currently stand and I would hate Civ 3 to have too good graphics and to have too much animation. That just looks stupid and childish.
-
Rome rules -
For me, the graphic isn't important at all, but the grephic seemed ok. I think it's funny when some of you guys complaint about that the graphics looks too mutch like CTP. There was nothing worng with the graphic in CTP........ it was just verything else that suxed (not everything but you get the point
). If you feel this type of graphic is bad..... go and play Black & White or womthing. The graphic have never been important in this genre games.
The only thing I care about in that screenshot was that you could see the bould que under the city name and that ROCKS. Makes it soo mutch easier to keep track of what your cities build......
Looking forward seeing more in game screen shots.
aCa (a Civilization addict)aCa (a Civilization addict)Comment
-
The graphics look great. LOL. Lawrence made fun of me! Anyway, I zoomed in, too.
Lawrence, you're right about those icons. A few cities have two in the upper corner. In kansas City one looks like a sword, the other like an Egyptian eye. Atlanta has something totaly different. Almost looks like a biscuit with a hat.
I see the health bars too. They all llok green. The cities have health bars, too, protruding from a small hut on the left like a flagpole.
What on earth is coming out of the mines near St. Louis?? I zoomed WAY in and I swear one looks like a face. Easter Island statues? Or just fruit?
Also, on a piece of land right next to the settler ment, there's a golden icon with a greenish cloud over it. I'm sure it's not a magic lamp...Those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it. And perhaps everyone else, too.Comment
-
Calm down folks: This is surely placeholder stuff. They are using this to work out the new rules and gameplay to make sure everything works. they told us that they are making new graphics. When they are done, they will probably combine the gameplay with the new graphics. I predict it will look great, especially if those little animated units from the official site are any indication.
------------------
No permanent enemies, no permanent friends.'There is a greater darkness than the one we fight. It is the darkness of the soul that has lost its way. The war we fight is not against powers and principalities, it is against chaos and despair. Greater than the death of flesh is the death of hope, the death of dreams. Against this peril we can never surrender. The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.'"
G'Kar - from Babylon 5 episode "Z'ha'dum"Comment
-
quote:
To save design time, art and sound assets for certain aspects of the game won't even be approached until they're in for sure.
that's a quote from the CGW article; it's way to early to get bent out of shape about design considerations; we should be trying to interpret what the screen shots represent in terms of gameplay, not design.Comment
-
Ok, I'm a big graphics guy and here is my take on the screenshot.
Good:
The hills and mountains.
The plains and desert terrain looks very nice.
The coastline. It looks good now, but it would be nice to have some animation showing wave action along the shore... similar to the way Railroad Tycoon 2 does it.
Borders look pretty good, but I will have to see how they actually move and function during the game.
So-So:
The forest squares. I know they probably want a general foresty look rather than individual trees, but the plains and especially the tundra squares with forests look a bit splotchy. Actually, the tundra squares with forest look bad. Maybe I'm wrong, but I thought tundra is pretty much free of trees. The forest actually looks pretty good against the grassland squares. One last thing about forest...shouldn't the forest areas on grassland look different than forest in the arctic region? Do palm trees grow in the artic or do pine trees grow near the desert?
The city icons are satisfactory. However, please have a different look for each civilization's cities.
The colored circles at the base of units. I think I prefer the flags from Civ 2.
Bad:
What's with that awful looking irrigation? It looks like Firaxis' artist was trying to paint a river and had a seizure. PLEASE, Firaxis, go back to the Civ 2 irrigation/farmland look.
I would love to hear what others think of my analysis, especially the guy from Firaxis that shows up here sometimes.
[This message has been edited by kaminwx (edited April 27, 2001).]Comment
-
The graphics are OK and I expect they'll get better.
That said, did anyone else find it interesting the the river seems to go between squares instead of through them? I've only played Civ II; did any other game do this? This could change all kinds of things like movement, trade, and attacking across a river.
Also, the mini-map seems to have areas of deeper green, so jungles probably haven't been forgotten.
Any guesses as to whether or not the land bridges north and west of Ecatopec will be passable by ships?"...it is possible, however unlikely, that they might find a weakness and exploit it." Commander Togge, SW:ANHComment
-
Its not good that the shots don't show SMAC's hilly curving polygon landscapes.. I hope they'll get this working in the final version,
it might be incompatible with specific resource sprite squares thoug-
though I do like being able to see i'm hiding my units on a mountain or hill which was less clear on SMAC.
comments?
Admiral Pete
Comment
-
It dosen't look like the land art is half way finished, though i like the continental shelf sticking out off the land.
That grass stuff just looks like they've made the SMAC fungus green and used that temporarily. (that twisted green vegetation on the land)
If its going to be released in another year (2002??) then there'll be a lot changing hopefully.. nowadays graphics is important so i hope they make a nice looking landscape.
Comment
-
The graphics look terrible. Hey forget the gameplay lets have quality eye candy. Or here is a strange idea, maybe we could have both.Comment
-
quote:
Originally posted by Nemo on 04-26-2001 10:49 AM
what are the little "F" by the cities? mybe a placemarker for the "F"lags?
[This message has been edited by Nemo (edited April 26, 2001).]
Did someone already clear this up? The "F" is for Fortify, like the "I" and "R" in the screen are for "I"rragation and "R"oad. What about the screen where they show what looks like a city view? Didn't I read somewhere that their getting rid of the city view? All in all this game looks great.Comment
-
i read this entire message and have come to a conclusion; you people complain to much....
"oh the citys look like a garbage dump", "its going to be a clone of ctp", "the irrigation looks boxy", "the graphics arent that good", "it looks like they took that right out of smac" just remember no mtter what you think, the game is still in developement, it will turn out all right in the end. so i dont want to hear anymore criticism unless its constructive...Comment
-
Er, i don't know why, but i can't see any reference to Civ3 on pcgameplay.co.uk !!! Even after a search, there is no reference to it!
Why me?!
Comment
-
quote:
Originally posted by Lung on 05-02-2001 09:47 PM
Er, i don't know why, but i can't see any reference to Civ3 on pcgameplay.co.uk !!! Even after a search, there is no reference to it!
Why me?!
Try http://www.pcgameplay.co.uk/media/im...ril/Civ3_1.jpg or go to the news section > last week > last thursday. They update thier web daily.
Comment
Comment