28-06-2004 16:36									#1
	Soren Johnson asked for a Question. Get a bigger avatar today!

Well you said "Any Questions?", so here are a few:


I noticed you placed CivIII on the long-gameplay corner of the Franchise Universe. But isn't CivIII a very technical game? Would CivIII not be better placed in between technical and gameplay?



According to the ppt file you are the lead designer of cIV. Reading further into the ppt file, I begin to notice that your ideas on making Civ are to make it more fun, rather than more technical and if the current audience doesn't like that, then change the Target Market Audience for the Civilization franchise. If this is true, I am just wondering, are you making this game based on games that you like to play or are you aware that the major section of the Civilization fanbase are more interested in the technical side of the Civilization franchise than the fun side. Civilization is a lot like chess to us players. To us, the fun is hidden inside the technical.

I'd like to see your views on this issue.

	29-06-2004 00:09									#2
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I don't think chess is a technical game, in the sense that is meant here. There are very few rules to chess, and only a small number of possible actions that any unit can make. e.g Rook only along rows and columns, Bishops only along diagonals etc. It is a game that is very quick to learn the rules for.

To me technical games fall under the topic of needing a large foreknowledge of, or high natural aptitude towards, the rules in order to play. They tend to have steeper learning curves and have less flexibility.

	29-06-2004 01:41									#3
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Where and when did he ask what question? (Soren)

	29-06-2004 02:40									#4
	Re: Soren Johnson asked for a Question. Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I think what Soren meant by "technical" was stuff like graphics and other implementation related stuff, as opposed to "gameplay" technicalities. After all, one of his examples of a technically oriented game was Doom III: the old doom gameplay with state of the art graphics engine. Civ, on the other hand, doesn't really stand or fall based on the technical improvements (even the difference between 2d and 3d isn't that important to a large portion of the fanbase) but on the gameplay features.

	29-06-2004 03:18									#5
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

hmm.. I was wondering if I was misleading myself with what his definition of technical was.

And Soren asked in the ppt file CyberShy.

	29-06-2004 09:28									#6
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

What is the ppt file and where is it located?
Remember that many people on this site didn't get into Civ3 which presumably has something to do with this ppt file.

	29-06-2004 10:38									#7
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The ppt file was about civ4 and the development from civ to civ4. It was a presentation Soren had held a few months ago.

If you search the newsitems you'll find more info on it.
I think civfanatics has a link to the downloadable ppt file.

	29-06-2004 15:24									#8
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by CyberShy It was a presentation Soren had held a few months ago.

In that case, I will just pretend I was at that presentation.

	29-06-2004 16:02									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Now pretent the answer Soren will give,
and give that answer to us

	29-06-2004 20:55									#10
	Remove this text

I've always taken civ as a full blown chess game.... but I don't quite understand how the classification effects the outcome... if you would like to elucidate me...