Atari Sells Civilization Franchise!

[Ned]

Originally posted by Oerdin
It seems Civ 4 will be dumbed down, er... I mean simplified, compared to Civ 3. This is supposed to make the series more understandable to newbies but I fear it may make the game to simple for old timers to enjoy.

I'll with hold judgement until more information is available though.

Argggh! Civ III was already dumbed down when compared to Alpha Centauri. The want to make a stupid game even more stupid?

BTW, if they were to make a Civ IV like Alpha Centauri, how would you implement fungus, mind worms and fungal towers?

[snoopy369]

They've already stated HOW they want to "simplify" Civ4. It's not necessarily in a bad way - but by removing "unfun" elements. Read Soren's explanation, somewhere. (I forget where. I think the other (civ4 forum) thread about this selling of the franchise links it.

Basically they want to remove or significantly change elements that are not fun - pollution, for example, or corruption - so the game is more fun to play, but still challenging. Yes, he admits that they may lose some degree of veteran players -- also admits this is always going to happen. But, they intend to remain true to the CIV ideal. I think it won't end up "dumbed down", just because they eliminate some of the less fun elements; they removed Caravans, a less fun element for many, yet replaced them with something quite more interesting and allow for more complex gameplay (resources) - even for the many who believe Caravans are the lifeblood of Civ2.

[Ned]

Originally posted by snoopy369
They've already stated HOW they want to "simplify" Civ4. It's not necessarily in a bad way - but by removing "unfun" elements. Read Soren's explanation, somewhere. (I forget where. I think the other (civ4 forum) thread about this selling of the franchise links it.

Basically they want to remove or significantly change elements that are not fun - pollution, for example, or corruption - so the game is more fun to play, but still challenging. Yes, he admits that they may lose some degree of veteran players -- also admits this is always going to happen. But, they intend to remain true to the CIV ideal. I think it won't end up "dumbed down", just because they eliminate some of the less fun elements; they removed Caravans, a less fun element for many, yet replaced them with something quite more interesting and allow for more complex gameplay (resources) - even for the many who believe Caravans are the lifeblood of Civ2.

It's been a long time since I played Civ III, but I recall that every game for me turned into a trading game, where every turn I had to do deals with every other player. It was ANNOYING. It was, at least to me, no fun whatsoever.

[VetLegion]

Do we know anything yet?

Please someone post here as soon as you find something out, I'm not watching other forums at the moment. Thanks.

[Brent]

Complexity is enjoyable. To me, simplicity is boring.

Building on SMAC does not require Chironian lifeforms.

I welcome the removal of corruption. I enjoy expanding as much as possible. I hate when one of the few advanced tribes I ever get from a goodie hut is worthless.

Caravans brought fun to keep the game playable, but Civ3 is playable without them.

I enjoy trading in Civ3.

[Nikolai]

I am positive to what I've heard of cIV. I'm pretty sure it'll work, as I am confident that Firaxis will listen to both the old guard and make the neccessary changes to keep the game fresh.

[Jon Shafer]

Either way, Firaxis has announced great moddability, so even those who don't get exactly what they want in the vanilla game will be able to change things that they want, or play pre-made mods by others

[Harovan]

It is good news to hear about the demise of Atari as publisher. I hated the guts out of Infogrames and never forgave them, that they dragged the good name Atari in the dirt of their filthy business. This is half of what it takes to make Civ4 a success. The other half would be to replace Firaxis by a company, which still understands the art to make a fun game, and with fun I mean enjoyable throughout the whole time from begin to the good or bitter end. Not a game, which is halfway enjoyable in the first two ages, and then becomes so boring, that watching a goldfish swimming in circles becomes a true relief. Unfortunately, the second step is not going to happen.

[Nostromo]

The other half would be to replace Firaxis by a company, which still understands the art to make a fun game, and with fun I mean enjoyable throughout the whole time from begin to the good or bitter end. Not a game, which is halfway enjoyable in the first two ages, and then becomes so boring, that watching a goldfish swimming in circles becomes a true relief. Unfortunately, the second step is not going to happen.

If you ask me (but you're not, so I'm saying it anyway ), its a basic problem with all Civ games. It has nothing to do with Firaxis: the culprit is the original Sid Meier design.
You expand, you expand and you expand again, and you end up with a ton of cities and workers. In other words, you end up with micromanagement nightmare on your hands. Not fun. Not fun at all. That's why I rarely finish my Civ games. That said, Civ 3 has a lot less micromanagement than Civ 2. Or maybe you're talking about something else?

[Nostromo]

Is it me or was combat in SMAC a lot more fun than the combat in Civ 3?

[Brent]

Expanding is good. Tons of cities is good. Tons of Workers is not good. Maybe Settlers and Workers should be recombined, that way you aren't stuck with as many workers and when you run out of space for cities it's a simpler matter to just use them as workers. and if you're stuck on one lanmass for a while you can build cities, then use settlers as workers, then when you can get to another landmass you can use them as settlers again.

[Nostromo]

I'm talking about ICS, of course. There are a lot of interesting threads about it. I don't think ICS is good. In fact, I hate playing that way. Unfortunately, ICS seems to be the only way to play if you want to win.

[Last Conformist]

This talk of removing Corruption worries me. There needs to be some penalty to far-flung empires, and I've not heard of any replacement.

Also, combating Corruption is part of the fun. I actually appreciated that they removed the corruption-free gov'ts of CivII.

[Jon Shafer]

I somehow doubt that Firaxis will regress and aim to make large emipres even more profitable than they were before.

I didn't like corruption because it basically made some cities useless. That is what isn't fun about it. Why should a city of 6 million people produce NOTHING simply because its far away from the capital? Realism aside, it's really not cool. There are better ways to limit expansion.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Brent
Complexity is enjoyable. To me, simplicity is boring.

Then I guess you like MOO III.