Are you excited about Civ4?

[spartak]

I'm a lot less excited about civ4 than I would be about SMAC2.

[CEO Aaron]

My vote isn't out yet, but it appears as though Firaxis is looking to reintroduce alot of the gameplay elements they oversimplified or purged outright from Civ3.

Customizable government types, a-la the SMAX style SE chart give me hope that Civ4 will regain the kind of depth, flexibility and complexity that was lacking from Civ3.

[Mart]

There are some features, like you mention, customizable government that possibly may make the game very interesting. Also the unit experience seems to be quite good, Firaxis plans many various types of experience traits.

The things that I would consider lacking - no polution, simplified environmental issues by that. I wonder if land terraforming like raising or lowering in smac would be possible.

Re pollution, most people disliked it as it was done in civ3. I would rather change pollution element to the form acceptable and more interesting than just eliminate that.

[Mr. President]

I'm a little over the Civilization series, to be honest. I know exactly why, it's because the ideal game would be historical with Alpha Centauri's flexibility. And I'd love that, but my Kai sixth sense tells me it'll never happen.

[Senethro]

Its interesting to note that Civ3 pollution was just Fungus popping.

[GeoModder]

Yes, but in SMAC fungus could be made harvestable with the proper techs -and SE-settings.

[Xian]

Originally posted by Commy
I would agree...a remake of SMAC would be much better than a sequel...just like civ 3 is a remake of civ 2...

Excactly, the entire concept of a "sequel" to a strategy game as open ended as SMAX makes absolutely no sense

woudl anybody try to make a "sequel" to SimCity 2000?

[Ka Plewy]

Originally posted by Xian

Excactly, the entire concept of a "sequel" to a strategy game as open ended as SMAX makes absolutely no sense

woudl anybody try to make a "sequel" to SimCity 2000?

Um, wouldn't that be SimCity 3000?
And we've had exactly three sequels to Civilization, so why not one for SMAC. A sequel to the game, doesn't have to mean it's starting from the ending point of the last game, it could be a re-imagining of the entire game.

[#endgame]

Cautiously optimistic.

[Darsnan]

Originally posted by Xian

Excactly, the entire concept of a "sequel" to a strategy game as open ended as SMAX makes absolutely no sense

I will disagree with that statement. I've always thought that SMAC(X) was primed for a sequel the moment they introduced the Progenitors into the game the way they did. Essentially a sequel could revolve around one (or more) Factions discovering the wreckage of a Progenitor spaceship. The Factions then clone the hyperdrive, and then armed with the ships starmaps they then head out into space to colonize new worlds. Essentially this version of a sequel opens up the whole galaxy to players!

Originally posted by Ka Plewy
A sequel to the game, doesn't have to mean it's starting from the ending point of the last game, it could be a re-imagining of the entire game.

It would have to be a considerable "re-imagining" of the same game, in order to convince me to pay $50 US for it. However, if it were to be made with the ability to "completely modify" it the way that cIV is promised, then that would probably be worth the money, IMO.


D

[Ka Plewy]

Originally posted by Darsnan
It would have to be a considerable "re-imagining" of the same game, in order to convince me to pay $50 US for it. However, if it were to be made with the ability to "completely modify" it the way that cIV is promised, then that would probably be worth the money, IMO.

While that may be true for you, it is probably not true for the majority of CIV/SMAC fans. Some of us did get sucked in by Civ3, because we all wanted a better experience. From what you've said before SMAC was your first introduction to Civ type games.
Also, note that many people buy the latest edition of games each and every year, look at the [marketing] success of the EA Sports titles, some people want the latest and [or] greatest, even if it is only a perceived improvement.
If the progression of SMAC 1 to SMAC 2 is similar to the progression from Civ2 to Civ3 (fewer features), then I won't be interested, however if it is similar to the progression from Civ1 to Civ2 (more features), then I'll probably be in.
I'll never buy the hype about AI effectiveness again, like I did with Civ3. If SMAC2's main sellingpoint is the AI, I won't be interested.

[Flubber]

Originally posted by Darsnan


I will disagree with that statement. I've always thought that SMAC(X) was primed for a sequel the moment they introduced the Progenitors into the game the way they did. Essentially a sequel could revolve around one (or more) Factions discovering the wreckage of a Progenitor spaceship. The Factions then clone the hyperdrive, and then armed with the ships starmaps they then head out into space to colonize new worlds. Essentially this version of a sequel opens up the whole galaxy to players!



D

PLus Darsnan, a number of your scenarios' premises could be adapted into sequel games. Ypu can have other races arrive or planet erupting or whatever. ... I see no reason why there aren't any number of plausible scenarios.

Oe they can just make a Smax 2-- don't care that it might cover the same timeframes -- People did not mind that with Civ2

[Flubber]

Oh and Civ 4?? I bought Civ3 fairly early and was disappointed. This time I will wait a few months and see if the consensus is that it is worth buying

[Net Warrior]

Are you excited about Civ4? No