GAME ATMOSPHERE (ver 1.1) hosted by Dominique

[Depp]

Civ 2 movies are very nice, the ancient ones, the others suck

SMAC movies all suck since none is interested in thing you don´t even know what they are. And the things someone says when you discover something often has nothing to do with what you discovered.... blah

CTP movies are very uneven. Some movies like stonehedge is really cool, but they often have to much a artificial look to them

[Imran Siddiqui]

CTP movies that were posted on Apolyton all SUCKED (in a way never known to Civ)

Civ 2 movies were good (some)

SMAC movies were excellent (All of them!)

And monolith, how do you personalize the interface for an Asian nation? Look at the SMAC interface (since they probably will use that that). Now tell me how you can have a distinction between European and Asian races on that?

------------------
Imran Siddiqui
Moderator SG Forums - www.sidgames.com/forums/ ,

"Sir, I would rather be right than be President."

-Henry Clay

[NotLikeTea]

The distinction is simple. The Asian interface would look more asian. Duh. ;-)

Seriously, I don't like the idea of customized interfaces either.. make them a gif or pck or whatever, and let us edit them ourselves, if we want, but they shouldn't spend time making dozens of them for all the different civs.

As to movies, I was indifferent to the CivII movies (though I love the Leonardo music), and while some of the SMAC movies were good, others were too much just swirly colours (Xenoempathy, for example)

[Icedan]

Im a Inteface Designer, and SMACS interface is absolutely shocking. It's the main reason I don't play the game.

So far, The best interface, is the main bar down the bottom (NOT COVERING HALF THE SCREEN)

It would be nice to have an option to see the main bar at the bottom drop off out of the screen when the mouse is not over it.
Like an Auto-Hide. (Can be annoying tho, thats why it should be made an option.)

The reason the main bar has to go down the bottom, is because the eye can rest down the bottom, rather than look up at the top - it can get quite stressing. And if you notice, your cursor mostly hangs around the bottom of your screen. You do that yourself, naturally.

Don't make the bar complicated!!! Make it simple, Extremely! The more complicated you make an image look, the less the eye can focus on it. Which results in annoyance, poor gameplay, etc. Surely Firaxis know this by now.

[Atahualpa]

The reason the main bar has to go down the bottom, is because the eye can rest down the bottom, rather than look up at the top - it can get quite stressing. And if you notice, your cursor mostly hangs around the bottom of your screen. You do that yourself, naturally.

Wow, quite interesting! I never thought of that.

My opinion is that the interface has to be much nicer. Smacs interface was much to steril (but so was the planet). Ctp's interface is better (for a worldhistoryTBS game), its colors are lighter and friendlier and the buttons look nicer.

Personalized Interace? If it is well made, why not (I would find it also interesting if I (European) can play with the Asian interface).

ATa

[Atahualpa]

Wouldnt it also add to atmosphere, when the interface changes with the government, or maybe in a religious government the units would report like: "For God and the Pope!" or something similar, while the Units under a fascist gov would report like: "For our Führer!". It would give you more the feeling of having a different government.

ATa

[Ladonna of Thar]

Okay, well, certainly no one has got the illusion that all of us like exactly the same things - but the essential thing for this forum is to find out what most of us would like to see in CIV3 - so , Imran, maybe you prefer SMAC wonder videos, but most of us seemingly don't.

Atahulapha (hallöchen ), the fact alone that you copied even two of those videos says much - how many games are there with which you did that?

About the interface: It's relatively simple (and has a GREAT effect on game atmosphere) to create fitting interface templates for each culture (maybe not for every single civ). For a nice example look at the Age of Empires interface. But of course we have to keep the feasability of such a thing in mind: While adjusted interfaces would be nice as well for cultures as for epochs, certainly both can't be done at the same time (erm... 20 civs multiplied by 5 epochs = 100 interface styles???).

Personally, I'd prefer an interface influenced by my culture / cive since it improves the identification factor (which isn't enhanced by epoch-dependent graphics, cute as the might be), the ideal being a editable interface for those hardcore gamers amongst us.

Talking about feasabilty: Alexander's Horse, maybe you haven't quite the right idea of how much time (money!) goes into videos/intros. They certainly wouldn't do such a thing just for some freaks who can download the videos optonally - no way.
Belive me, those videos cost really large sums, so they are a fix part - or they aren't at all

Lastly, about the jokes: Good translation is the key, and this is one of (IMHO very few) examples where the people at Activision did an excellent job with CtP. But in my view humor is a must so as to not let the player have too much of the impression of doing hard work (a feeling I can't help having when I play CtP). As the positive feedback on the High Council clearly demonstrates, at least ONE common line of humor is here, hm?

[SnowFire]

Second votes for the replay, except I want a much much better replay than what we had in SMAC.

I also second the newspaper.

I also agree with most of what Imran says. The SMAC movies were good- they coulda been better, but they were definitely at least good. Also "Personalize...even in the interface" just isn't possible for a Civ game. I want personalization as much as you, but in the interface? Perhaps as an option to let zealous home-programmers do themselves, and that way we'll easily have 30 different interfaces to choose from.

However, I disagree with "de-emphasizing" winning the game. You're free to play to whatever you want to afterwards. Me, I prefer a set goal, like "Complete the map as fast as possible" like in HOMM II. I think 4 or 5 set goals as fast as possible, like in SMAC, was and still is just fine.

[NotLikeTea]

By de-emphasis of winning, I don't mean making winning less important.

In Civ, winning is everything. If you do not conquer the world, or launch a ship, the game is essentially a failure.

I'd like it if playing the game with a good civilization is a victory in itself. I want to do what is best for my people, and be rewarded for this. Would add to realism, since this is the goal of most leaders. No dictator says "I'm going to conquer the world, because I want more points!" Instead, they attack for resources, wealth, pride, etc... These should be goals, not only the quest for more points...

[SnowFire]

No dictator says "I'm going to conquer the world, because I want more points!"

Ah, but they do.

Instead, they attack for resources, wealth, pride, etc.

Pride, exactly. That's what the points are for. "Me, as dictator, can now stomp my boot into the human race-forever." Or "Under my leadership, humanity entered the stars." The resources and wealth are only incidental and done because they are needed to achieve the main goal that drives leaders to succeed. Which, for us, is points.

Speaking of which, is this a good thread to discuss the scoring system in? Or is there another?

<font size=1 color=444444>[This message has been edited by SnowFire (edited June 01, 1999).]</font>

[NotLikeTea]

Well, yes and no.

When I play to win, I don't feel like I'm making an impact into history forever. I feel like I'm playing a game to win.

It's not a matter of winning conditions, per se, but a matter of atmosphere. CivI did conquest well, and felt satisfying, but CivII felt a little bland.

As to scoring, I'd like to see a "Winning and Losing" thread...

[Alexander's Horse]

Laddonna of Thar: On intro videos, the fact that they cost a lot of money is precisely why I suggest they be cut. I fall firmly into to the gameplay over graphics camp. But I take your point that the download idea is probably not the answer.

On American jokes, how do you translate them for English speakers? The English speaking world is in itself very diverse. If anything, I think Americans are in fact the odd ones out where humour is concerned. I suppose in the end it doesn't really matter, as long as the commentaries aren't annoyingly parochial or idiomatic (i.e. riddled with Americanisms).

[Eggman]

Megadittos on the "History of the World Replay". To see the wars and key discoveries and conquests and population growth and government changes and all that Jazz would be a blast. Combine that with map replay (POLITICAL MAP!) and I will love Firaxis forever.

And humor can be a subjective thing, even inside the same culture. We Americans get exposed to about every type of humor imaginable because of all the various cultures in our country. Some jokes carry from culture to culture and some don't. Example: English comedy: Monty Python is considered hilarious in the US. Fawlty Towers and Red Dwarf are liked by some but most find them too dry (i.e. too serious).

[Alexander's Horse]

Eggman

I'll keep my sweeping generalisations to myself in future but what your saying really reinforces my point on humour. Its the "cornball" humour that turns me off - but that's just me. I like Red Dwarf, Faulty Towers, Absolutely Fabulous, lots of people don't. On the other hand, I watch Dave Letterman and try to work out why everyone is laughing - I imagine there are people here who get it and in the U.S. who don't. His jokes are like "Mad" magazine jokes.

Ever seen what passes for funny in Germany? No wonder they launched two world wars......oops there I go again...."Don't mention the war".

[Dominique]

Alexander's Horse,

I'm afraid you couldn't be more wrong with what you say about german humor... I *am* german and e.g. LOVE the humor of Douglas Adams (the Brits seem to be a bit more able as far as sophisticated humor is concerned, as opposed to American... erm... "humor" )

And, since you mentioned it: Wasn't it history's biggest (and worst) joke to have this clown as a "Führer"? So, we really know a good laugh... dead seriously