 |
| |
|
|
VetLegion
|
|
I have read a few of the threads in this forum, and as this is the second or third (closer to fifth actually) time I am seeing a list being built I think I can observe some patterns.
I am certain that in the following two years or so see a reiteration of one or more of these phenomena (actually, most of them, I believe..)
1. List organizing efforts (how did I figure this one out?  )
2. Idea redundancy (Duplicate ideas/threads, ideas from the Civ III List making it into Civ IV list)
3. At least one new project started as a spinoff by people involved in the List discussions
As for the threads themselves, we will see a lot of...
1. Threads descending into historical discussion
2. Threads descending into historical discussion
3. Random brainstorming it would take a supercomputer to sort out and make sense of
(Forums, while ok for brainsorming, are pretty unsuited for concentrated discussion which would be better served by branching threads. Of course, efficiency is not the most important issue here, since it will take years for this game to be made, so the List is in no hurry)
And may I also be free to suggest a few common types of "civ discussant" we shall see here:
New enthusisast this guy knows what it takes to make Civ IV a blast and won't spare bandwidth to let us all know.
New enthusiast 2 this guy knows the first guy is wrong and won't spare bandwidth to let him know.
Moderator will act if those two get out of control.
Hard core believer in CtP - This guy will start his posts with "It already exists in CtP. And not only that, but also...". There is little chance any good will come out of these bitter old farts.
Organizer this guy will make futile attempts at keeping threads on topic, fleshing out interesting concepts, trying to fit them into a hierarchy of a sort...
Firaxis employee this guy (or a few of them) may appear at some point, but it is not very likely. If they post, everything they utter will be observed with utmost respect and a class of scholars may form just to interpret their words.
FPS fan - This guy will keep trying to combine elements that don't fit. Can I play battles in Quake style? I say fine, but let's leave it for the patch
Civ2MPer This guy will lurk around, post arrogant comments and make bets with his fellows in Civ 2 MP forums about "who will succumb and play Civ IV first", which ofcourse will provoke endless laughter and witty remarks from the vets.
Atheist He will make casual appearances and irritate everyone by repeating the forum legend that Sid either never existed or is certainly not alive any more, let alone working on Civ IV.
Yin26 space intentionally left blank -
....add your own stuff...
Ofcourse, in the process great fun will be had by all and many a story will be created to be remembered fondly after the game is built 
The list itself will be great, just like the last one was.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Maquiladora
|
|
quote:
Hard core believer in CtP - This guy will start his posts with "It already exists in CtP. And not only that, but also...". There is little chance any good will come out of these bitter old farts.
|
Not really. Alot of people voted for stacked combat, alot more than visit the CtP1/2 forums in fact.
What about,
Useless thread starter - may create threads about what type of people post in lists, clogging up the list forum and be slagged off by bitter old CtP fart.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Peter Triggs
|
|
Gone Fishin, Canada
Jan 2000
time: 05:33
|
|
Civ3 Perfectionist: Civ3 is absolutely perfect. The only thing they need to do is change the name to Civ4. And anyway, they'll fix the bugs in the next patch.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
VetLegion
|
|
And in case anyone thought I was trolling, it was not so.
I fit in all the above categories except I haven't played CtP much, so the post is self irony if anything.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
hexagonian
|
 |
Gnawing on your mind...
Jun 1999
time: 23:33
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by VetLegion
OK, to clear this with my dear CtPers ...
...So my comment about "bitter old farts" was meant in the grognard sense, of which I consider myself to be one too, so there. NHF, ok? |
No offense taken - I get a laugh out of posters who, as I posted earlier in this thread, are blind loyalists to ANY game - be it CTP or civ - though I tend to laugh more at the Sid civ loyalists because of my own bias. I prefer (Modded) CTP overall, and as a CTP2 Modder, I will promote and defend CTP2, but I did break down and bought 'Conquests' and I am playing it at the moment. (which says that I do actually enjoy aspects of civ3 because I did spend the money on what amounts to an Xpack for civ3)
Besides, as a CTP player, I'm used to the shots taken at the series. Is it going to change my preferences regarding which game I will play? No - I play a game because I enjoy it, not because of some other player's opinion of the game. But I am also interested in the 'why' when it comes to gaming preferences. Why is stacked combat considered better/worse than single unit combat? Why the fanaticism concerning Public Works vs Workers...?
IMO, both games have much to offer in the way of gameplay. It may be that the gameplay issues of each game were not implimented as well as they could have been, but the foundation ideas for those gameplay issues from each series are often good starting points - and should be considered for civ4, especially since CTP2 will never have a true company-created sequel.
Last edited by hexagonian on 08-01-2004 at 20:53
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Fosse
|
|
U.S.A.
Mar 2002
time: 23:33
|
|
I'm seeing a lot of the Option Compromisers.
THere will be a debate about which of two incompatible approaches to gameplay are to be preferred, with sound arguments and resons on both sides. Then, out of the blue comes...
"Just make it optional at startup. Now everyone is happy."
The less reasonable it is to make something optional (ie, spherical or flat world map? Make it Optional!), the more likely this person is to arrive.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
VetLegion
|
|
Good observation 
Reminds me of a text I read a couple days ago, by Brad Wardell, the project lead of Galactic Civilizations. He basically says the same thing you wrote, if they say something "can be optional", it probably should be left out...
quote:
Our young development team was hungry for any sort of good word, so the regulars on our forums carried a lot of weight. It was often difficult to say no to their ideas, even if their suggestions made the game unplayable for the vast majority of users. For a game designer, it is challenging to differentiate between a "hardcore feature" and something that will appeal to most people. I have a general rule of thumb for this, which goes like this: If the person proposing the new feature uses the phrase "You could always enable/disable this feature from the options screen
", it's likely a hardcore feature. |
http://www.gamasutra.com/features/2...ardell_04.shtml (full article is a postmortem on GalCiv, but you have to register to read it).
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33.
Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-01-2004 07:21
Amazing. Looking forward to reading your posts during the List, and after they make the game 
|