 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
Sn00py
|
 |
From New Zealand
Aug 2001
time: 13:34
|
|
Just a few thoguhts:
If I know how to do it, I will go about and change the graphics (hopefully for the last time, Firaxis  )
Anyway, I was just looking at the isometric screenshot, looking at the terrain.. thinking.. how did they make it.. how are the tree's made.. etc..
Then it struck me.. this is a 3D engine, they said they are writing it in XML. If I can remember correctly, RoN is also written with XML, and anything that was 3D in RoN, could be changed in the XML file. I remember making the worker units in RoN about 50 times larger. They were Giants (I might still have a screenshot somewhere, if I can find it I will post it).
But anyway, it's obvious what I am suggesting here.. the mountains are 3D, so why not just make the mountains 50 times larger? There you go, big ass mountains, big ass tree's, big ass cities.
Firaxis must just be setting the defaults here, knowing that us fans will just go ahead and change it to our liking.
I'll tell you the truth, when I saw it, I first thought "cool, you can tilt the screen". But then I thought "It kinda sucks". But now I think "This is going to be a seriously powerful game - modding wise".
I don't want to get over the top here, but you could, theoretically, create your own RPG game yknow?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Locutus
|
|
ACS CTP1/2 Manager & Civ4 Co-Manager
|
 |
Hengelo, The Netherlands
Nov 1999
time: 06:34
|
|
I've by now seen the screenshot IRL as well, but wasn't able to scan them unfortunately. The graphics look much better than they appear in sn00py's low quality scans, so things are definitely starting to shape up (graphically, anyway), which is good news considering that magazine screenshots are usually a few months old, so the art team still had about a year to go to improve on this when these shots were taken.
Those who have the bandwidth will definitely want to check out the higher resolution version sn00py has, I hope and assume they will be more representative of the real thing.
quote:
Originally posted by Adagio
What bothers me is the graphics makes it more diffecult to see each tile  |
In the 2nd screenshot that's true, but it was taking under a very low angle. In the first screenshot though, I'm actually surprised by how straight the terrain looks (even though that was taken under and angle as well), individual tiles are fairly easy to recognise.
quote:
It seems like there's always 5 people in a group, is that the health points for a unit?  |
I reckon that once cavalry and tanks and stuff come along, there won't be 5 members per unit any more as that would never fit in a single tile, so it's probably mostly just a cosmetic thing, as in for example RoN (although there it *is* true that damaged units have less members, but it's not a full replacement of the good old-fashioned health-bar, more like a rough indicator; this might be true for Civ4 as well)
quote:
Originally posted by Maquiladora
Well at least it doesnt all look like desert island terrain, although it looks a bit too colourful and whats up with those seemingly random pyramid mountains that have popped up out of the ground again like in civ3? Where are the mountain chains... Ill wait to see how modern screenshots look though. |
I think colourful is a good thing: blandness of colour was one of the problems with the Civ3 graphics. CtP graphics are pretty colourful as well and I really like those. Plus, it should be noted that these low-quality scans of sn00py have been overlighted, the graphics are a bit darker on paper (as you can sort of see from the last image sn00py posted, although that's actually too dark).
I agree about the mountains though, they look... weird. And indeed, as in Civ3, mountain ranges seem to be sorely missing again.
quote:
Originally posted by Solver
while Civ4 might have requirements along the lines of 1GHz and 256 MB RAM to play nice. |
For a game that aims to be out in 2006, I think that would be very fair system requirements. Let's face it, what respectable gamer still has a 500 MHz PC? That's the kind of system they sold 5-6 years ago. If you go to a PC shop today, they don't even sell new systems with less than 2.5 GHz and 256 MB RAM anymore (and it's still more than 6 months before the game is released, by that time 4 GHz will probably be the minimum). Civ3 couldn't be played on a 386 either, and I don't think anyone blames Firaxis for that... It would be ridiculous if Civ4 required 3+ GHz and 1.5 GB RAM, but I doubt that'll happen. At most a decent graphics card will be required, but that's true for any new game, and you can already pick up a okay card for around €50 (probably even less by the time Civ4 ships)...
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
I have an Athlon 1.7 with 512 MB RAM and a Geforce 2 MX videocard. |
Your problem is the graphics card, Geforce 2 is teh ubercrap. Even a Geforce 4 costs less than €30 ATM; a cheap FX card doesn't need to cost more than €50 either, and gives a considerably better performance. I would consider upgrading ASAP, not just for Civ. (Unless of course Civ is the only game you play, then wait 6 months so you can pick up a Radeon 9800 for the same price  )
Last edited by Locutus on 08-04-2005 at 16:45
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Alex
|
 |
Brasil
Mar 1999
time: 02:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Locutus
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
I have an Athlon 1.7 with 512 MB RAM and a Geforce 2 MX videocard. |
Your problem is the graphics card, Geforce 2 is teh ubercrap. Even a Geforce 4 costs less than €30 ATM; a cheap FX card doesn't need to cost more than €50 either, and gives a considerably better performance. I would consider upgrading ASAP, not just for Civ. (Unless of course Civ is the only game you play, then wait 6 months so you can pick up a Radeon 9800 for the same price ) |
Yes, I agree that my problem is my gfx card. Besides being old, it was already a crappy one when it was released. Unfortunately, here where I live a good gfx card is still very expensive, so I'm postponing the decision to buy a new one till it becomes absolutely necessary.
The requirements for Pirates clearly stated that one would need a gfx card with T&L support, and I don't know if the GForce 2 MX can handle this. Maybe this is the reason for Pirates's low performance on my system.
But I still think that my original point has some relevance: Gamebryo engine seems to be very demanding in terms of hardware; it somehow reminds me of the gfx engine that was created for Grand Prix 4: its performance was abysmal on anything but the most advance machines at the time the game was released.
On the other hand, Firaxis will have a lot more time working with Gamebryo to refine it and to tune it so it can perform smoothly on various different machines. That's what I expect.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Locutus
|
|
ACS CTP1/2 Manager & Civ4 Co-Manager
|
|
Hengelo, The Netherlands
Nov 1999
time: 06:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Alex
The requirements for Pirates clearly stated that one would need a gfx card with T&L support, and I don't know if the GForce 2 MX can handle this. Maybe this is the reason for Pirates's low performance on my system. |
As reported by Strategy Informer, Firaxis requires a 64 MB video card for Pirates, I'm guessing you only have 32...
quote:
But I still think that my original point has some relevance: Gamebryo engine seems to be very demanding in terms of hardware; it somehow reminds me of the gfx engine that was created for Grand Prix 4: its performance was abysmal on anything but the most advance machines at the time the game was released. |
I don't think 1 GHz, 256 MB and a 64 MB video card (~GeForce 3 or higher) is particularly demanding (= the specs for Pirates). My PC is currently 3 years old and I haven't upgraded since I bought it, but even I meet those specs easily (2 GHz, 512 MB, Gefore 4 MX 64 MB -- I deliberately bought an el cheapo graphics card at first because I knew I wouldn't need a better one for at least 3 years; only now with R:TW and Civ4 in the picture am I starting to look for an upgrade). Sure, it ain't no CtP2 or Civ3, but as I said those were game that were released around 2001, Civ4 is aiming at 2006. Even RoN (almost 3 years old when Civ4 hits the stores) requires 500 MHz/128 MB RAM + 16 MB GFX, and that game was remarkable for it's low minimum specs for an RTS (and esp. good performance at those specs). E.g. Command & Conquer: Generals was released only a few months after RoN but requires 800 Ghz/128+32 MB (and it only runs properly on a system with twice those numbers).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Fintilgin
|
|
I'd like to take a look at the high-res screenies, if you don't mind sending out one more.
Thanks!
You'd think Firaxis would release some -real- screens at some point though...
Last edited by Fintilgin on 09-04-2005 at 07:52
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Alex
|
|
Brasil
Mar 1999
time: 02:34
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Locutus
As reported by Strategy Informer, Firaxis requires a 64 MB video card for Pirates, I'm guessing you only have 32... |
Nope, 64 MB Geforce 2... That's why I think that perhaps the game requires a 128 MB videocard to run smoothly.
quote:
I don't think 1 GHz, 256 MB and a 64 MB video card (~GeForce 3 or higher) is particularly demanding (= the specs for Pirates). My PC is currently 3 years old and I haven't upgraded since I bought it, but even I meet those specs easily (2 GHz, 512 MB, Gefore 4 MX 64 MB -- I deliberately bought an el cheapo graphics card at first because I knew I wouldn't need a better one for at least 3 years; only now with R:TW and Civ4 in the picture am I starting to look for an upgrade). Sure, it ain't no CtP2 or Civ3, but as I said those were game that were released around 2001, Civ4 is aiming at 2006. Even RoN (almost 3 years old when Civ4 hits the stores) requires 500 MHz/128 MB RAM + 16 MB GFX, and that game was remarkable for it's low minimum specs for an RTS (and esp. good performance at those specs). E.g. Command & Conquer: Generals was released only a few months after RoN but requires 800 Ghz/128+32 MB (and it only runs properly on a system with twice those numbers). |
I agree with you that 1 GHz, 256 MB and a 64 MB videocard is not particularly demanding, especially for this day and age. That's why I don't understand why Pirates has a bad perfomance on my system, after all I'm slightly above the minimum requirements. This could indicate that the minimum requirements both for Pirates and for Civ4 (which are, after all, based on the same gfx engine) are just the minimum necessary for the games to run. Running smoothly is another thing.
I just happen to think that a turn-based strategy game should not have high system requirements at all. RoN and C&C:G are both RTS games, so they cannot be compared with a game like Civ. And the reason why RoN was not so demanding in terms of equipment, IMO, is that it wasn't totally a 3D game, contrary to C&C:G, which was totally in 3D (AFAIK, I haven't played C&C).
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Civrules
|
|
Wixom, Michigan, U.S.A.
Dec 2003
time: 00:34
|
|
[Edit]
Last edited by Civrules on 09-04-2005 at 01:20
|
|
| |
|
|
|
asurania
|
|
hey now i want to see this screen shot if someone can email it to me at asurania @ hotmail . com
thank you
hey ebgames says that the release date of civ 4 is Jun 1 / 2005..do i smell a lie here from eb ?
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:34.
Apolyton Time is 00:34. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
08-04-2005 06:03
); get rid of infinite rail movement (?).
|