SMACII Speculation

[Hydro]

I was poking around and found this thread on AC from way back on 7/12/07 associated with Civ4 - Beyond the Sword: http://www.joystiq.com/2007/07/12/fi...a-centauri-ii/

Others may already have seen this little side note. The author was suggesting that an Alpha Centauri II would be highly desirable, and of course I agree. There is that pesky little problem with EA owning the rights to SMAC.

It seems pretty clear to me that EA won’t be doing anything with Alpha Centauri anytime soon. So if a deal could be reached between EA and Firaxis I guess the question is whether there would be enough trust to have a Firaxis team not lead by the esteemed Brian Reyonlds take on the project. For all SMAC’s flaws (which for me are eminently forgivable considering its attributes and age) it does deserve an update. But then I think of the train wreck that Moo3 turned out to be. Sure Moo3 had its attributes, but it sank under its severe terribly flawed implementation – a sure sign that the team had poor leadership and a less-than-clear vision on what needed to be done to make the game both fun and a worthy sequel.

I’ve recently revised my opinion (upward) on Civ4 in the recent past so I guess I’m willing to give Firaxis a chance to have a remake of SMAC – if they get the chance to.

Hydro

[Darsnan]

Re: SMACII Speculation

Originally posted by Hydro
Others may already have seen this little side note. The author was suggesting that an Alpha Centauri II would be highly desirable, and of course I agree.

Name a better sci-fi 4X TBS that has come out since SMAC(X) was released. I’d say the market is ripe for a game of this genre!

Originally posted by Hydro
There is that pesky little problem with EA owning the rights to SMAC. …. if a deal could be reached between EA and Firaxis I guess the question is whether there would be enough trust to have a Firaxis team not lead by the esteemed Brian Reyonlds take on the project.

< foundless internet rumor > when BR left Firaxis it was made quite clear that his contract prohibited him from making a TBS type of game such as Civ or SMAC. However when SJ left Firaxis this does not appear to have been the case: what could EA have traded to Firaxis in order to get them to agree not to invoke that clause in SJ’s contract? < / foundless internet rumor >

Originally posted by Hydro
For all SMAC’s flaws (which for me are eminently forgivable considering its attributes and age) it does deserve an update. But then I think of the train wreck that Moo3 turned out to be. Sure Moo3 had its attributes, but it sank under its severe terribly flawed implementation – a sure sign that the team had poor leadership and a less-than-clear vision on what needed to be done to make the game both fun and a worthy sequel.

I recently downloaded SJ’s old Civ4 slideshow titled “Don’t Blow it” where he details a lot of things that go into making a game great. One item was concerning the “KISS principle” which IMO was not followed for MOO3: I think if a SMAC sequel were to ever occur, then Firaxis would follow the KISS principle, as it has clearly worked for Civ4. Although this might take some of the attributes away from SMAC, it would probably ensure that it does make a great game, and that it does not turn into a train wreck the way MOO3 did.

Originally posted by Hydro
I’ve recently revised my opinion (upward) on Civ4 in the recent past so I guess I’m willing to give Firaxis a chance to have a remake of SMAC – if they get the chance to.

I’ve personally been playing a lot of Next War. Since the base Next War mod doesn’t really differ from the default Civ4 until the endgame, why I have been making scenarios that take advantage of the new units, buildings, abilities, and techs (“Second Coming of Quetzocoatl” is one of these scenarios btw) so as to make the game “interesting” for me. One of the things I have noticed in Next War is that several of the units and other things are close proximities to units in SMAC, as follows:

Walker is a Battle Ogre
Behemoth Tank is a hovertank
Airport is a psi gate
Paratroop is a Drop Troop

In another BtS mod (I think its “Age of Ice” or something like that) there is an eagle unit that has a gravship chassis, and there is also a tile improvement that has the attributes of a borehole. Probably other units/ improvements/ etc. that I haven't recognized yet.

D

[Verrucosus]

As far as gameplay is concerned, I am confident that Firaxis is capable of producing a successful remake. I am not so sure whether they will succeed in recapturing the atmosphere of the original. There's a lot that can go wrong in that area (cartoony graphics, uninspired project movies for example), but there's also the chance that they can make the SMAC universe more accessible to the players (more detailed bases, more distinctive unit graphics, more comprehensive datalink descriptions etc.). In any case, I would love to see them try.

Verrucosus

[RedFred]

Over the years my opinion has changed on Firaxis.

For me CivIV is like CivII with all the fun surgically removed.

SMAC was the most creative TBS game ever. But now Firaxis has either grown older and lost its edge, or forced be ultra conservative and adopt minimal changes to the Civ franchise by the people bankrolling the game. I am no longer certain that they have another great game in them.

[Hydro]

Originally posted by RedFred
SMAC was the most creative TBS game ever. But now Firaxis has either grown older and lost its edge, or forced be ultra conservative and adopt minimal changes to the Civ franchise by the people bankrolling the game. I am no longer certain that they have another great game in them.

I guess this is the key. SMAC was just so creative and well done. It just drips with pithy quotes and personalities that are so well integrated into – and are key to - the game. For me this is the hard part: creating a storyline that pulls you in and then the game mechanics keeps you - kind of like an event horizon (without the burst of gamma rays to note your passing). All there is otherwise is pulling out mister spreadsheet to evaluate game mechanics and shoving units around the map.

My fear is that a SMACII would be a loveless Civ clone with the various faction leaders images superimposed on the Civ-style leader dialog screens. Without the back story that has a meaningful place in the game, Civ-based SE, and other keys then major elements the atmosphere of SMAC will be lost. I do like Civ4 but, frankly, I could care less about the races and leaders: they are all interchangeable and the only thing I care about is the attributes I want to try. If a SMACII devolves to this then it will be a pale imitation of the original SMAC.

Hydro

[Main_Brain]

Re: Re: SMACII Speculation

Originally posted by Darsnan

< foundless internet rumor > when BR left Firaxis it was made quite clear that his contract prohibited him from making a TBS type of game such as Civ or SMAC. However when SJ left Firaxis this does not appear to have been the case: what could EA have traded to Firaxis in order to get them to agree not to invoke that clause in SJ’s contract? < / foundless internet rumor >

Really? I seemed to remember that clause only was effective for a few years. (Another rumor)

[Hercules]

I would need to go back to an earlier Smac2 wish list thread, to check ideas, but it seems to me there needs to be these new components:

* a compelling storyline as mentioned above. Worth exploring here.

* a swathe of new techs (difficult) so either they would be in- between techs, ie additional techs added, to progress from say for example silksteel to photon (in the Civ4 style - acceptable?) . There is a lot of scope here because many posters over the years have re- modded the tech tree, to make the Cloudbase Academy wonder less game breaking and/ or

* completely new bluesky techs short of transcendence.

* new techs that provide a new path o victory. Underground?
maybe a version of culture a la CIV

* new graphics

* we all agree that it gets very boring in the end game so there is scope there to change things.

* make it easier to have more than 7 play multplayer as in Civ4.

Apologies if all these thoughts have already been put forward before.

[Hercules]

Originally posted by RedFred
Over the years my opinion has changed on Firaxis.

For me CivIV is like CivII with all the fun surgically removed.

SMAC was the most creative TBS game ever. But now Firaxis has either grown older and lost its edge, or forced be ultra conservative and adopt minimal changes to the Civ franchise by the people bankrolling the game. I am no longer certain that they have another great game in them.

Agree mostly with this but if they are even partially inclined to A smac 2 they need that flow of ideas from us as well.

[Darsnan]

Originally posted by Hercules


Agree mostly with this but if they are even partially inclined to A smac 2 they need that flow of ideas from us as well.

I don't think I've ever jotted down all my ideas into one coherent set of posts before, so here goes!

Given that Civ4 took the approach of using "30% old, 30% updated, and 30% new" for Civ4 and that this seems to have worked quite well for Firaxis, I would suspect they would probably do the same for a SMAC remake, if they were so inclined.

30% Old
So what parts of SMAC should be carried over? I think obviously the existing tech quotes and SP movies: the breadth, scope, and depth that went into developing these was significant, and I still find myself listening to the tech quote and watching the SP movies (Cloning Vats and Self Aware Colony are two that immediately come to mind, as well as the one with a cartoon Morgan yelling at Lal "get off my land you Peace Keeping son of a beep!"). Stay with the original 7 Factions: my thought here is that, having lots of Factions in Civ4 works because there is abundant history associated with each of these Factions, and people can relate to each of these unique civs. This is not the case in a sci-fi setting. Therefore to get as large a band of ground support for each Faction as possible why less is better, so stick with the 7 original Factions.
As far as the Unit Workshop is concerned: here are the arguments I see typically associated with the Unit Workshop:

a) its a lot of work to do. Yes thats true. If there are budgetary constraints associated with a SMAC remake, then should this be left off the list? Thats a tough question to answer.
b) its a cheat for human players. My observations of how the Civ4 AI plays is that it creates "stacks of death" to throw at players. Because these stacks typically contain an array of units, then one single countermeasure unit cannot be whipped up on the spot via the Unit Workshop to counter these stacks (i.e. the sheer mass and makeup of units counters the human's ability to improvise on the spot).
c) the AI doesn't know how to use it. Yes, thats absoultely true. One of the things I was experimenting with towards the end of my SMAC career was fleshing out the #UNIT list to around 40 - 50 specialized units (and remember 64 is the max number of iindividual units that can be built) per game. Therefore my thought would be to give the AI a "cheatsheet list" of units that it should build for various maps that it encounters. Say for a 70% land/ 30% water map the selected list would contain more land units and less water units, with emphasis on ECM and AA special abilities. Whereas the unit list for a 70% water and 30% land would have more naval units, and would feature units with the amphibious assault and marine detachment special abilities.

Last in this section would be the storyline with its interludes: should it be kept as is, or, because the game itself is so modable, why a different storyline could be developed, such as what I did for Beta Lyrae, as listed in the next section.

30% updated
The first thing that comes to mind here is the AI: say maybe splice in Blake's AI along with any new updates that people have thought of. Also an updated tech tree, perhaps something along the lines of Maniac's "SMAniaC mod".
There are also numerous units that should be added to the default list, in order to get the AI to build them, units with AA chief among them, as well as marine detachment units.
Graphics: here is one of the areas I think Firaxis went wrong with the game, as they were trying too hard to create a dark mood. Too much Yang and no Yin, and I think the graphics turned a lot of people off to the game. My observation here would be that of how Stephen King writes his horror stories: each story begins on a bright sunny day, everything is happy, and as the story progresses King takes you thru the twists and turns of the story, leading you deeper into the darker layers and labyrinths of the mind. I think the game in general would benefit from such an approach, as the graphics after all are only skin deep. A lighter set of graphics would then capture the casual gamer better (Console-centric gamers would be like "look - sweet graphics!"), but those with a deeper intellect would listen to the quotes, and watch the SPs, and realize that there are much darker undercurrents to the game than what its surface (i.e graphics) implies. Therefore I think in addition to simply updating the graphics, that they be given a slightly lighter tone, such as what is used in Civ4.

30% new

We need alien critters, dangit! Say something along the lines of Heinlen's dopey joes, or Niven/ Pournelle's lizards from "Legacy of Herot". I'd also like to see some aquatic creatures, such as a kraken which prowls the depths of a planet's oceans and can drag ships and subs down to their doom. Another one I've thought a lot about is an aquatic creature that lives along the coasts of lakes and oceans. Give it the triemme chassis, amphibious assault, and the withdrawal ability: this would then be a creature that attacks like a croc or orca in that it grabs its prey from the shallows (or coasts) and drags them underwater. Definately an early deterent to early exploration/ coastal development!
I've also given the concept of "uplift" of native species some thought. Say that there is a new resource represented by some creatures (on land or water) that have displayed "higher cognitive traits". There would be a type of supply crawler that could then be placed on top of these "resources" and choices given regarding the uplift of the species (resource): either proceed down a path of true uplift where there is a sharing of resources (represented by food and ECs), or one where there the resource is merely utilized for the benefit of the discoverer (more of an enslavement of the creatures' natural talents than of a true uplift), say in the form of added minerals. This would also be reflected in the tech tree by a "Y" in the tech beelines where one line would specialize in techs that enhanced the resources for "enslavement" or for "mutual sharing". Also, if you were to use the code for how a town grows (improves) after being worked for X number of years, then say that if the uplift tile is worked for X number of years (say twenty), then the creatures have improved to "Level 2 Uplift", and if the tile is worked for an additional Y years (20 more?) then they become "Level 3 Uplift" with a corresponding increase in benefits for the Faction working the tile.

Anyways, thats about all for now. I've been fighting the flu for the last half a week, and I'm starting to fade. Hopefully my ideas are coherent enough to get across (if not I'll just blame it on the Nyquil! )


D

[vyeh]

I'd like clarification on a couple of points.

Originally posted by Darsnan
Blake's AI

Could someone provide a link to this?

Originally posted by Darsnan
Also, if you were to use the code for how a town grows (improves) after being worked for X number of years, then say that if the uplift tile is worked for X number of years (say twenty), then the creatures have improved to "Level 2 Uplift", and if the tile is worked for an additional Y years (20 more?) then they become "Level 3 Uplift" with a corresponding increase in benefits for the Faction working the tile.

What code? Are we talking about the nutrient box filling up?

[Xian]

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/news_index.php?story=17597

Good news for the possibility of a real SMAC II

For those who haven't heard, EA might get to purchase Take Two. Bad news for most people in thw game industry, good news for those who want to see IP's reunited with their original creators.

[Hercules]

Thanks for this.

It would be great news, if they announced Smac2.

[Maniac]

How much a percentage of the PC game publishing market does Electronic Arts control?? All I ever seem to hear is EA taking over this, taking over that.

[Xian]

Heh, Firaxis isn't the only company sold to another company only to be bought back again after another round of extreme consolidation by EA - Irrational (now 2K Boston) might get the chance to make SS3 because they too have been reunited with an IP they once lost.

I don't know about the total game market, but I do know that if this deal goes through, EA will control every sports franchise in video games, period. It will literally be impossible to buy a football game from anyone other than EA.

Anyhow, it looks like the deal won't go through until Grand Theft Auto IV is released.

[Darsnan]

Originally posted by vyeh
I'd like clarification on a couple of points.

Could someone provide a link to this?

I don't think there is a link. But if you look in Blake's sig it says "BtS AI programmer" or something to that effect.

Originally posted by vyeh
What code? Are we talking about the nutrient box filling up?

In Civ4 when a worker builds a hamlet and it is worked X number of turns it then becomes a town. Y more turns after that it becomes a village, etc. - this is the code I am refering to. Putting this into a sci-fi setting I could see a Faction attempting the uplift of a promising native species (represented on a tile by a resource icon). "Work" the resource tile X number of turns (i.e. uplift the clients X number of turns) and they gain a level in sophistication, and hence a greater return on the investment. Work the tile Y more turns and the uplift enters another phase with even greater return to whoever is working the tile. The tile could also be pillaged just like a town or village could, knocking it down one status level per pillage event.

Does this answer your questions?

D