PCReview: "Sid is very much hands off" on Civ III, plays same as civ II

[Phutnote]

As far as I understand, Sid Meier worked on Civ one from start to finish.

Civ II was a Brian Reynolds baby, as was Alpha Centauri. Sid's name was attached for marketing purposes and he had little to do with the game.

I seem to remember hearing that Sid was to be very much involved in Civ III, especially after Brian left, but now (according to that preview thing in PCZone or something like that) I hear he isn't really involved at all.

Anyone know what is really going on with this?

The preview also claims the game plays pretty much like Civ II. The preview is not exactly clear whether the preview guys got to play the alpha build of the game (I know they have a playable/playtesting version they use to push the game along). If the game plays pretty much the same as Civ II, and the review seems to support this, what's the point? Better graphics? Do all the improvements like resources really not make that much of a difference?

The review mentions they're 'tweaking' a classic design, but not doing any major innovations. It sounds tremendously disappointing. I was so hoping to hear that Civ III was more than a 'tweak' of Civ II.

We gonna get a Civ III that's a Civ 2.5 with Sid only lending his name to a design he didn't even work on?

Hmmmm.... inquiring minds wanna know.

Post something reassuring!

=)

Phutnote

[yin26]

The last thing I heard for sure was that when Brian left, Sid had to take over the Civ project. He then went on to try to do a Dino game first, which was cancelled, then back to Civ. In the meantime, it looks like he's doing a Sim Golf thing with Maxis, which might well mean he has mainly put Civ3 in other people's hands and just checks in now and then.

If that's true, it's a crap shoot as to how Civ3 will play.

If that's NOT true and Sid is involved on a daily basis with Civ3, we are guaranteed a good game. Gotta say, though, it seems he REALLY likes to do new stuff and hardly ever revisits things. I have a sinking feeling he's in "director" mode for Civ3, which ain't bad all things considering, but one can only wonder how TRULY great Civ3 would be if Sid put all his passions into it.

[Phutnote]

Sigh.

I think you're right about him not wanting to revisit things.

I'd heard the same thing about him being involved on Civ III, but then the article specifically states that he's 'hands off' which means he's probably working on the 'secret' Firaxis project and the Golf thing and not much on Civ III at all.

This is very disappointing to learn, as I agree that if Sid really did put his energies into Civ III it'd be great.

Wonder what role Jeff Briggs is playing in it.

That the preview guys found the game so similiar to gameplay of Civ II set off alarm bells for me. I'm really dropping my expectations for the game after hearing that.

I had been hyped by Sid's involvement to expect Civ III to be a bigger leap than Civ I to Civ II.

I'm really getting kind off put off by their putting Meier's name on every damn thing they release even when he doesn't work on the game. It's such a shallow marketing move, because it isn't true. It was Brian Reynold's Alpha Centauri, not Sid's.

Wonder if that finally burned Brian's butt enough for him to leave and get billing for his own games.

Oh well. The game will come out and I'll probably buy it anyway.

Phutnote

[yin26]

Well, just imagine:

Sid: "Make the game yourself pretty much. I'll just approve stuff and give an idea or two."

Brian: "Will I be able to finally get MY name on the box? I've made some pretty good games, you know."

Sid: "No. It's better to market it with my name. That's just how it is."

Brian: "Can I at least get complete creative control?"

Sid: "No. Not with MY name on the box."

...ad naseum...

It was time for Brian to go out on his own. I still have great hopes for Civ3 because they have one programmer in particular (Chris Pine) who is not only talented but understands well what a smash hit with his name as lead programmer could mean for his future. And no doubt with the demise of Dinos, Firaxis needs to make sure they are dotting their i's and crossing their t's here because all but the biggest gaming companies are just a game or two from bankruptcy.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yin, I doubt it was anywhere near as contentious as that .

Brian just wanted to spread out, and make games himself. I don't think he felt great animosity from making a game called 'Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri' (which IIRC, people on the SMAC board who didn't like the game derisively called it BRAC - Brian Reynolds' Alpha Centauri).

It is like sports.. Assistant Coaches like to make a name for themselves, but don't feel animosity when they are working under a legend.

[Adm.Naismith]

If these news are true (but we'll never know, won't we? ) I must tell I'm not so surprised. Abuse of Sid's name on the box is a pity IMO, but money rule$ and ego bloat...

Of course Sid went back to Civ III project to put it back on track after the "Team Exodus", but if Firaxis have more than a project rolling of course its mind is more needed in completely new stuff.

Lot of fans asked for "a revamped Civ II, just slighty better" and surely the publisher want exactly the same cash cow again. It seems that the new team put effort to improve the game, but some part really stink of old to me (disclaimer: I promise to apologize if I'll be showed wrong by real game publishing; I really prefer to apologize that prove right and miss a great game! ).

Well, we tried hard, lot of suggestions are made and gifted to Firaxis, ans some where great ideas that surely can find their way on Civ III or another Strategy game.
Remember that sticking his name to the box can be a two edged sword if the game end as a flop. Sid surely know, don't he?

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

[Timeline]

Why is it all the negetive threads that get the most attention here?

Notice some of these points from the CGW preview,

"The only advantage I have," Sid Meier laughs when asked to explain what it is like to be Sid Meier, "is that I get one 'get out jail free card...I get to make one mistake." It's clear that the most highly regarded designer in PC gaming doesn't overstate himself. "The Sid Meier who gets his name on the box is almost another person. He gives me certain freedoms, but I don't take it too seriously"

Sid Meier is all about game design. "My name on the box is not a guarantee, I still have to write good games"

Also from this article:

“Must...Play...Test

The moment Firaxis inked the deal with Hasbro, Meier and his design team started playing Civ III. They replaced the art assets of Alpha Centauri with crude Civilization-style placeholders, and modified the rules to reflect their design decisions for this new game.

For Meier, playing a game is the most critical aspect of it's design. Without it, he argues, the originl classic would never have achieved its lofty status. It’s Dogma at Firaxis - everyone plays as much as possible. People talk, revisions are made, and they play some more.

For this reason, many of the design elements are still in flux, which means that some of what you are reading about will be tweaked, changed, or even absent. Civilizations may or may not have inherent advantages. Ditto for the special units in the game. The American F-16 or the Roman Legion may have special powers, but not if Firaxis feels it unbalances the game."

Sid Meier knows what makes a great game - play testing. Please go and read my thread "Don't worry, be happy". It has interesting info and I think you may enjoy it.

Timeline


[This message has been edited by Timeline (edited May 08, 2001).]

[Fintilgin]

Well, I've always felt that CivIII will mainly just be an expansion on the earlier Civ games. Now that's ok, I guess, I'll buy the game and I'm sure I'll enjoy it, but it's not really what I want.

What I really want, is something Firaxis would never do, and something that would cause three quarters of Apolyton to have a heart-attack and hate Firaxis forever.

I wish Firaxis had dumped just about everything from Civ 1 and Civ 2 and started from scratch with the concept of making a turn-based game centered around the rise of Civilizations. Of course this would be, in a way, a crazy move which would be very risky. It would also probably allienate a lot of fans. So it technically does make more sense to just polish up Civ2 with a few enhancments, neat ideas, and new graphics.

This is why right now Master of Orion III sounds much more exciting to me then Civ3, because they're trying tons of risky new concepts. Religions with unique game effects based on their beliefs, individual leaders for all portions of society, a limited number of `focus points' that can be spent to change things each turn, etc etc.

Now, it may be that MOO3 won't work out very well (though I doubt that), but I'm much more excited about a game that's taking a lot of risks and exploring new territory, then one which is simply enhancing and expanding an old design.

If a game based off the MOO3 paradigm of your people having their own desires and goals and minimizing micromanagment while enhancing the `experience' was being developed in a historical `civilization' context rather then outer-space, then I'd probably forget about CivIII entirely. Maybe someday, someone will try....

Joe

[jordanz19]

"plays same as civ II"

This is only the very, very, early version. The started to play the game with placeholders, kinda of like Civ 2, gameplay on SMAC.I suspect they are still playing a slightly modified version of this now, and it will change.

[Roman]

Frankly, I don't care about how intimately Sid is involved with Civ 3, as long as it will be a good game.

I realise, though, that for some people Sid is a God and provides some form of guarantee that the game will be good, so I understand why it is important for some people.

[RonHiler]

quote: Originally posted by jordanz19 on 05-09-2001 12:24 AM "plays same as civ II" This is only the very, very, early version. The started to play the game with placeholders, kinda of like Civ 2, gameplay on SMAC.I suspect they are still playing a slightly modified version of this now, and it will change.

The current CGW pipeline lists Civ III release date as August 2001. I don't know where they got that date, but CGW is the most respected computer gaming magazine that exists. They don't print rumors. Someone in the know has set that as an official release date (maybe Hasbro, maybe Firaxis) or it wouldn't be there. It could, probably will, get pushed back, but I'm guessing no later than December (gotta hit that Christmas release!) before Hasbro starts insisting the game go out the door. In fact, I note the preview article says December (though the pipeline for that same edition lists August).

So the idea that "This is a very very early version" is nonsense. They have only a few months left. Games take years to create from start to finish. You can believe me, I know from firsthand experience. The fact that they are recycling an old game engine certainly gives them a leg up. But even so, if that date is anywhere near correct, they better have most of it locked down by now. At this point, my estimate is they should be in late Alpha or early Beta.

If they are not, and this is a very very early version, then someone within Hasbro and/or Firaxis is going to be extremely dissapointed this Christmas. Either that, or we're going to get a buggy unfinished game out of the box, because at this point, they don't have near enough time left to go from "very very early version" to "finished version".

Ron

[Lord_Davinator]

certainly not good news... was expecting much more from Civ but I guess moo3 will have to do and EU definitely will keep me busy

[Timeline]

quote: Originally posted by jordanz19 on 05-09-2001 01:42 AM This is only the very, very, early version.

Well jordanz, I believe you are right about this in one way; in that it is only a very early (about 50 - 60% complete) ALPHA VERSION that *we are seeing* and that game magazines are seeing.

quote: Originally posted by RonHiler The idea that "This is a very very early version" is nonsense. At this point, my estimate is they should be in late Alpha or early Beta.

Again, it’s possible you are both right. We are seeing the very early version (Alpha), but they are actually much deeper into development. My guess is that they have (possibly large) portions of the Beta close to finish, and they are close to completing the Alpha version (or their blueprint version) and getting that how they want it. They will no doubt, as you stated Ron, soon be working completely on the Beta.

quote: The current CGW pipeline lists Civ III release date as August 2001. Someone in the know has set that as an official release date (maybe Hasbro, maybe Firaxis) or it wouldn't be there. It could, probably will, get pushed back, but I'm guessing no later than December (gotta hit that Christmas release!)

I am actually still hoping they will be getting it out AFTER Christmas, as I have heard many reports that they are shooting for early 2002 . . . but everyone knows these reports unreliable, even the “respectable” magazines usually don’t really know.

quote: Someone in the know has set that as an official release date (maybe Hasbro, maybe Firaxis) or it wouldn't be there.

LOL . . . well, I guess it’s possible . . . anyone els believe this? Even if it is an official release date from Firaxis, it can, and probably will, get pushed back, most likely even past December. If it is a release date from Hasbro . . . I suppose that could be different.

Ah well, I still think it’s coming in early 2002. Hey, I can dream can't I?

quote: certainly not good news... was expecting much more from Civ but I guess moo3 will have to do

Oh my goodness, you are 100% right! The sky *IS* falling! At least I still have MOO3.