Humanitas (A New Civilization Game)

[FrostyBoy]

I know, which is why I asked like this: "Judging from the look, do you think the gameplay might very well turn out to be good?"


"Judging from the look", meaning, can you use your imagination to see if you would enjoy a game with graphics like this. These screenshots and my questions were not about the gameplay of the game itself, (politics, trading, etc) but about how the graphics can enhance the gameplay. See, if the graphics were 64x64 square, top-down terrain, then you can't connect certain gameplay aspects with the graphics if the graphics don't allow the possibility to enhance the gameplay.

I did not release the interface or units because its too much information released.

[Urban Ranger]

It appears your scale is much bigger than Civ, so each tile is going to cover a much smaller area.

[LDiCesare]

I know, which is why I asked like this: "Judging from the look, do you think the gameplay might very well turn out to be good?"

Wekk, then my answer would be yes. But then I think NetHack and ADOM are good, so to me the main point with graphics is they should not slow down the game.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Sn00py
I know, which is why I asked like this: "Judging from the look, do you think the gameplay might very well turn out to be good?"


"Judging from the look", meaning, can you use your imagination to see if you would enjoy a game with graphics like this. These screenshots and my questions were not about the gameplay of the game itself, (politics, trading, etc) but about how the graphics can enhance the gameplay. See, if the graphics were 64x64 square, top-down terrain, then you can't connect certain gameplay aspects with the graphics if the graphics don't allow the possibility to enhance the gameplay.

I did not release the interface or units because its too much information released.

Having read this I still don't think you can expect us to make any comments on gameplay. And as I said earlier graphics are not the make and break factor for TBS. Basically, it looks fine, carry on. When there is something more concrete to comment on there will be more to say.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Sn00py
I know, which is why I asked like this: "Judging from the look, do you think the gameplay might very well turn out to be good?"

Railroad Tycoon II has better graphics than RT, but the gameplay was worse.

So, the answer is, insufficient information

[Wernazuma III]

The graphics, at any rate, are awesome!

I despise the graphics of Civ4, I like yours much more. On your game, however, I'll have to judge at a later time. What does a pretty look have to do with a pretty soul?

[FrostyBoy]

At some point in the future we will release gameplay features of the game, but right now we want to solidify what we have done and are planning to do. We don't want to change anything after we have told everyone what is in the game.

[Atragon]

Hrm, Sn00py, I can understand why 1024X768 seems like a good resolution, but for people with LCD displays being able to change the resolution is nice since scaled images can look like ass.

Especially people with widescreen LCD displays, going from 4:3 to 16:9 aspect ratio is painful.

All I propose is to allow the user to change the size of their window onto the world, do not change the size of anything, just show more of it.

I know how 1024x768 looks like stretched to 1920x1200 and I take that into consideration when making purchase decisions for games I might play on my laptop.

[Urban Ranger]

BTW, make sure your game can run in a window.

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by Sn00py
At some point in the future we will release gameplay features of the game, but right now we want to solidify what we have done and are planning to do. We don't want to change anything after we have told everyone what is in the game.

That is fine, but it means that all that we can offer you at present is a "looks fine, keep us posted", which isn't very helpful to you.

[FrostyBoy]

Originally posted by Atragon
Hrm, Sn00py, I can understand why 1024X768 seems like a good resolution, but for people with LCD displays being able to change the resolution is nice since scaled images can look like ass.

Especially people with widescreen LCD displays, going from 4:3 to 16:9 aspect ratio is painful.

All I propose is to allow the user to change the size of their window onto the world, do not change the size of anything, just show more of it.

I know how 1024x768 looks like stretched to 1920x1200 and I take that into consideration when making purchase decisions for games I might play on my laptop.

You can zoom in and out. (can make the zoom level at Civ3's normal level)

[FrostyBoy]

Originally posted by DrSpike


That is fine, but it means that all that we can offer you at present is a "looks fine, keep us posted", which isn't very helpful to you.

Actually the "looks fine" part is very helpful and was all I was really looking for.

[Atragon]

Originally posted by Sn00py



You can zoom in and out. (can make the zoom level at Civ3's normal level)

But that doesn't do anything to address the stretching effect that occurs when you take a normal source (say 1600x1200 for example) and display it on a widescreen display (say 1920x1200). The net effect is that circles are slightly oval, people look extremely broad, squares appear slightly rectangular, and so on.

[FrostyBoy]

Use the stretch display option on your monitor.

[Atragon]

Which will result in image distortion.