Interview with Sid - Hints on possible MMO, new games and........Civ5?

[DrSpike]

An accurate, if rather tardy, assessment.

[LordShiva]

Actually, we're barely on page 3.

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Blaupanzer
and Sid said he'd like to try an MMO, which led some here to presume a Civ-like MMO -- which he did not say.

Probably people presumed it because a Civ-like MMO would be the only one with a blink of a chance to survive. Everybody knows in what dire need the world is for yet another Tolkienesque MMO.

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph


Probably people presumed it because a Civ-like MMO would be the only one with a blink of a chance to survive. Everybody knows in what dire need the world is for yet another Tolkienesque MMO.

Wrong.

SMAC MMO
Colonization MMO

even a Sid Pirates MMO would work

[Harovan]

Originally posted by Heraclitus
Wrong.

SMAC MMO
Colonization MMO

even a Sid Pirates MMO would work

And these are not Civ-like because? Did you even read what I wrote and try to understand my point?

[Heraclitus]

Originally posted by Sir Ralph


And these are not Civ-like because?

Everyone was disccusing a civ-based MMO.



And BTW have you played Pirates?

[Harovan]

UOTTE

Originally posted by Heraclitus
Everyone was disccusing a civ-based MMO.

SMAC and Col are Civ-like.

And BTW have you played Pirates?

No and neither Golf

[Heraclitus]

Anyhow imagine a SMAC MMO, you could have megaguilds=factions. You could have real factions, also the mindworm halucinations offer a lot of flexibility.

Or a Colonization MMO, that would be big in the US.

[Heraclitus]

Re: UOTTE

Originally posted by Sir Ralph


No and neither Golf

Another one! A Golf MMO.

[Harovan]

A Golf MMO? Interesting, how would you imagine that to work? Seems a pretty absurd idea to me.

[Harovan]

Pirates MMO would be another thing, obviously. That I could imagine, unlike Civ.

[Heraclitus]

In any case, I imagine a civ-esque MMO being about Civilsation, not about Sid Meier’s Civilization.


The best game model would be one in which every one would have an important but not leading role in their civ. The game would start without any civilizations just players. A few would be warlords with a bloodthirsty band of warriors under them, a few would be tribal leaders, others shamans, trying to gain as much spiritual or secular influence. Or a lone explorer/trader. Perhaps a migrating enginerr/artist/scientis?

The tribal leaders might contacts such a warcheif, they might work together. Or the warcheif might become a barbarian raiding NPC and player villages. A PC explorer might open up new resources for the village or go seek out peoples, increasing his personal wealth by trade and gaining “EXP” in that manner.


Later with the effects of emergence, new classes, and specialization you would have a Rome-like civ (which would be a guild of sorts) with dozens of influential senators, generals and CivRome like “city manager” Governors. Underneath them hundreds of merchants, explorers, businessmen, minor managers, artists, scientists, priests, minor military commanders and mid-level managers. Interacting with tens of thousands of NPCs that would be under their collective influence or, even if you were powerful enough, control.

The political system would be wide open. Are there courts? Will the most successful civs be military dictatorships or democracies?

Would you be loyal to your civ in hash times or would you abandon it?

And the wonderful massive wars.





You would more or less "play" the roles of GP, specialists and certain units or governors, with the possiblity to use "real" politics to become an importan politican or even leader of your civ.