16-06-2005 09:52									#31
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

.

Last edited by Maquiladora on 16-06-2005 at 10:01

	16-06-2005 10:32									#32
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Sn00py You have to read my post carefully; I said I cannot be excited about what I don't know. I know that CivIV is coming out. I'm not excited about that. I have seen all of CivIV's screenshots and gameplay deatils. I am not excited about them either. I CAN base my excitement on assumptions and/or expectations, but history has taught me well to avoid doing this.

You're not unexcited, you're just underexcited.

	16-06-2005 11:05									#33
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Absolutely.

	16-06-2005 11:28									#34
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Sn00py I'd just like to point out to Cybershy that the two people who 'whined' before you posted your first post, were not actually whining, we were just stating the fact that we were interested, but not excited.

you forget about KyuuA4's post, right above mine.
He already knows that he's not going to buy the game
Only because the game has not enough civs to start with.

quote: For me, I cannot be excited about something I don't know; agree?

Most of the time people get less excited when they learn more

quote: In due time my apprentice, you will learn to master the art of posting on forums. Oh and posting a lot does not make you experienced, it just makes you loud.

Yeah, that art is: complain about everything.
I'm very eager to learn that to since apparantly right now I'm really not a part of the club

	16-06-2005 13:58									#35
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Some point in the not-so-distant future legions of sociologists, political scientists and literary scholars will pore over stuff like this and make grand judgements about our society and the times it which it found itself.

... ...

Hey, that means I may yet win a Nobel.

(Hooray for relative performance! )

	16-06-2005 15:19									#36
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

i'm all about change, but the problem is this. Civ2 is the perfect game. The only problem with it is that not enough people play multiplayer.civ4 is going to be another game that is intended to appeal to a huge audience, which civ2 was not.

	16-06-2005 20:15									#37
	Increase Your PM Length

Well flame me, blame me, kill me - I'm excited. The next step in Civ evolution is coming, and so far the series has not let me down. Of course each instalment is different from the rest, of course some features will be no more - but there will be so many new things to play with!

We will have to create new strategies based on the new possibilities, get used to the new 3D engine - I think it's going to be enormously fun, and I trust Soren and the team at Firaxis to make it good. If it's not, shame on them and we'll keep playing Civ1, 2 and/or 3 depending on each player's taste... it's as simple as that.

	16-06-2005 21:40									#38
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by CyberShy Oh my After the first months of enthousiasm finally the negative feelings have entered the board. All is looking bright on the cIV front, but of course internet wouldn't be the internet if there wouldn't be huge ammounts of people who can't resist to only spread negative feelings, even BEFORE a release. Never enough huh. Never satisfied. It doesn't matter how good something is, some people will always voice their criticism. Things need to be exactly done the way they want it to be done. Get a life, enjoy your life, instead of bashing and critisizing your way through it. Please move over from this messageboard and don't poison it. In fact: please disconnect from the internet. I'm ashamed for being part of this "never enough / never satisfied" race.

So I just found out about Civ IV and I can't make a comment? I can't say how displeased I was with Civ III and I am letting the creators\publishers\who ever is in charge that I will not be suckered in again with Civ IV.

I am letting them know of our or at least my displeasure what happened before and I will not rush in and get Civ IV this time unless it's really great that it lives up to the hype, unlike vanilla Civ III and I don't want to wait for patches or xpacs to make the game just good.

I am sorry that you feel this way about my post, but because of people like me voicing our displeasure YOU will have a great game in CIV IV hopefully.

The days of buying a game as soon as it comes out are gone, so I believe the intial days sale of Civ IV will not even come close to what was Civ III. People do not want to be disapointed again.

onto reading the other posts now

	16-06-2005 21:46									#39
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Solver The original post in that thread is simply wrong, and a classic case of judging before the release. It really amazes me anone can already know that Civ4 will turn out bad if the game hasn't been released yet, heck, there is not even a single preview of a close-to-gold version, because the game is another half a year away from its release.

What is wrong with my post? All I said was that I am not excited about Civ IV. I couldn't sleep the months before Civ III was going to be released, as I believe almost everyone else was. I bought it the day it came out, and was disapointed with vanilla Civ III, just like most people are.

I didn't say the game sucked, didn't say I wasn't going to buy it, all I said was that I wasn't excited about it, and was wundering how others opnion was.

When Civ III was in development, everyone couldn't wait, we all just died in torment waiting for the game,(figure of speach).

I just don't have it for Civ IV, and letting the people who care in the development and publishers know it, so they better be carefull and not screw up this game.

	16-06-2005 21:50									#40
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Yolky, I was not referring to your original post in this thread. I was refering to http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...threadid=135078

	16-06-2005 22:13									#41
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Kaak i'm all about change, but the problem is this. Civ2 is the perfect game.

this is why I don't take the naysayers seriously

	16-06-2005 23:31									#42
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Trifna Yolky, I propose that you put your hand on Soren's Powerpoint. Give a look at CivFanatics website if you want it, since I know it's there. It's very interesting, and showing their vision of Civ just as how it works in the gaming business on many interesting aspects. I expect a sunny future

I am sorry, I forget who Soren is. Name sounds familiar but can't remeber who he is.

As I said I will give Civ IV a try but I won't go out and buy it right away. I might wait till the price to come down or at least I will wait a month after the release and read the reviews and mostly troll the forums and read peoples comments.

What I guess I am trying to say is what happened from Civ III and MOO III, I will wait and see before I buy a game right away as soon as it comes out. I will wait a month or so, and then after reading peoples comments I might not get the game.

I assume(could be wrong though) there are alot of Civers with my attitude now and the powers at be for Civ IV better becarfull this time around.

davor

	16-06-2005 23:37									#43
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Sn00py You have to read my post carefully; I said I cannot be excited about what I don't know. I know that CivIV is coming out. I'm not excited about that. I have seen all of CivIV's screenshots and gameplay deatils. I am not excited about them either. I CAN base my excitement on assumptions and/or expectations, but history has taught me well to avoid doing this.

WOW someone who understands me. That is what I am getting at. I am not saying the game suck, or not getting it. I am saying from previous experinances that I can't be excited about Civ IV like I was for Civ III.

Why do people keep saying I am bashing the game? Where did I bash the game? There is a difference from not being excited for the game,( I can wait anthour 4 years before the game is released) and saying the games sucks wich I never did.

	16-06-2005 23:39									#44
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Solver Yolky, I was not referring to your original post in this thread. I was refering to http://apolyton.net/forums/showthre...threadid=135078

sorry wasn't directed at you but the other guys

	17-06-2005 01:16									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

I'm trying not to think about it, since the teapot starts boiling quicker if your not watching it.

	17-06-2005 02:40									#46
	Increase the size of your Attachments

Am I excited about cIV?

No.

I loved Civ2.

SMAC had some things that I wanted Civ2 to have like growing borders, and the design-your-own-unit thingy. But I could not get my little mind around the graphics and techs. What was all that? I know it was sci-fi futurama stuff, but come on.

Based on some of the features of SMAC, I was excited for what Civ3 could be. I was very excited. The increased negotiations where exactally what I wished Civ2 would have. The borders, the culture - Civ3 delivered. I missed the movies. Civ3 is a great game. I don't know what all the complaining is about. Maybe I'm not good enough to be bored with the pathetically weak AI. (AI seemed to be the biggest complaint. I don't see it.) I love Civ3!

cIV -
What no terrorism, sabotage? What's that? Let's take the spears and guns away too. We'll create the Peace Movement Unit. "Our words are back with candle light vigils".

Religions? That was covered with the tech tree, buildings, and culture. Yes it would have been nice to see how a religion could spread across national borders, but the use of a select few actual religions bothers me. Why couldn't it be more abstract? They abstracted the government types in cIV.

The units of the screenshots look huge. I know that Civ is basically a board game on the PC. That's fine. The size of units never bothered me before. Maybe it bothers me now because they are trying to make the game more life like with the 3D - they are failing.

What is the point of having a 3D globe view that is really just a tapered cylinder? Why can't my units cross the poles? A true 3D world would have been a selling point for this game. I think they missed the boat here.

I also see how much of the micromgt is being removed. Um that was part of Civ! I am not a good micromanager, but that was part of the challange.

3D Graphics, running water, worked land animations. What kind of PC am I going to need? I've got two pretty decent PCs that take long enough to process all the AI's moves late in the Civ3 game. What is this going to do to game play in cIV? I don't see the point in adding all the heavy graphics if the game does get anything from it.

No. I am not excited. In fact, I am saddened by the previews.

I guess I will be alone on the Civ3 Forum come December 2005.

	17-06-2005 02:49									#47
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Yolky I am sorry, I forget who Soren is. Name sounds familiar but can't remeber who he is.

The lead designer of cIV and the AI guy for C3.

Frankly, you might want to do a little research on the game before posting your opinion of it on a forum...

	17-06-2005 02:54									#48
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by skrobism cIV - What no terrorism, sabotage? What's that? Let's take the spears and guns away too. We'll create the Peace Movement Unit. "Our words are back with candle light vigils".

Because of course Civ sans "poison water supply" and "sabotage production" isn't Civ at all

This is even more inane given that there's no reason to assume sabotage is out. It's most likely part of the espionage screen, like in C3.

quote: Religions? That was covered with the tech tree, buildings, and culture. Yes it would have been nice to see how a religion could spread across national borders, but the use of a select few actual religions bothers me. Why couldn't it be more abstract? They abstracted the government types in cIV.

Why not just abstract civilizations too? Since the name has no gameplay effect, why do you care?

quote: The units of the screenshots look huge. I know that Civ is basically a board game on the PC. That's fine. The size of units never bothered me before. Maybe it bothers me now because they are trying to make the game more life like with the 3D - they are failing. What is the point of having a 3D globe view that is really just a tapered cylinder? Why can't my units cross the poles? A true 3D world would have been a selling point for this game. I think they missed the boat here.

Because if they had made it actually spherical they would have had to ditch the entire tile system and move to hexes or something and God knows you would be complaining about that.

quote: I also see how much of the micromgt is being removed. Um that was part of Civ! I am not a good micromanager, but that was part of the challange.

Right... because it's such a HUGE challenge to play Pollution Whack-a-Mole

	17-06-2005 04:06									#49
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Religions? That was covered with the tech tree, buildings, and culture. Yes it would have been nice to see how a religion could spread across national borders, but the use of a select few actual religions bothers me. Why couldn't it be more abstract? They abstracted the government types in cIV.

Religions are a new concept in Civ4 that bring a new thing to the gameplay. That's good. More abstract? They are already abstract as all religions are the same. How exactly are you bothered by the selection of these exact religions?

quote: What is the point of having a 3D globe view that is really just a tapered cylinder? Why can't my units cross the poles? A true 3D world would have been a selling point for this game. I think they missed the boat here.

The best thing about the 3D view apparently is that you can zoom in and out easily, as well as rotate the map if you want, and have different views to play however you want. No need to cross the poles. If it was in, they'd basically have pretty big landmasses for the Antacrtica and the North pole which you'd never want to cross anyway.

	17-06-2005 05:13									#50
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I'm not excited. Eager, maybe, to see just how big of a screw-up it turns out to be. But not really excited.

quote: Originally posted by CyberShy Oh my After the first months of enthousiasm finally the negative feelings have entered the board.

I've been popping in here occasionally for a long time now.

quote: It doesn't matter how good something is, some people will always voice their criticism.

It doesn't matter how bad something is, some people will always lap it up.

quote: Get a life, enjoy your life, instead of bashing and critisizing your way through it.

Indeed.

quote: Please move over from this messageboard and don't poison it. In fact: please disconnect from the internet. I'm ashamed for being part of this "never enough / never satisfied" race.

You're the one who's satisified with anything you're given. Go play in a sandbox.

	17-06-2005 05:16									#51
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Solver The best thing about the 3D view apparently is that you can zoom in and out easily, as well as rotate the map if you want, and have different views to play however you want.

That's not particularily amazing as far as "best things" go. Infact, it's pretty frivelous - a novelty at best. It's not a game-making feature. Certainly nothing to justify a new game engine and higher system requirements.

quote: No need to cross the poles. If it was in, they'd basically have pretty big landmasses for the Antacrtica and the North pole which you'd never want to cross anyway.

Yes... because russia, for instance, would never want to fly across the north poll in the event of a war with the United States. It's just too big of a land mass, and really cold too. They'd just go the long way to avoid it.

	17-06-2005 05:24									#52
	Tired of ads?

quote: That's not particularily amazing as far as "best things" go. Infact, it's pretty frivelous - a novelty at best. It's not a game-making feature. Certainly nothing to justify a new game engine and higher system requirements.

I'd say it's quite useful to be able to change your view to some arbitrary zoom and angle. It doesn't even require much higher system requirements - according to Firaxis, 1 GHz and 256 megs.

quote: Yes... because russia, for instance, would never want to fly across the north poll in the event of a war with the United States. It's just too big of a land mass, and really cold too. They'd just go the long way to avoid it.

That's an inane argument, because the only thing Russia would be shooting over the poles are nukes, and the ICBM's can hit anywhere on the map anyway.

And of course the entire map system should be changed to accomodate something of improbable utility (how often will the two superpowers be directly across the poles from each other?) in the very late game.

	17-06-2005 05:39									#53
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker quote: That's not particularily amazing as far as "best things" go. Infact, it's pretty frivelous - a novelty at best. It's not a game-making feature. Certainly nothing to justify a new game engine and higher system requirements. I'd say it's quite useful to be able to change your view to some arbitrary zoom and angle.

Why? it's a board game. Changing the zoom and angle isn't going to help you see anything on a two dimensional plane. If anything, it will only make it more difficult to see.

quote: That's an inane argument, because the only thing Russia would be shooting over the poles are nukes, and the ICBM's can hit anywhere on the map anyway.

I don't believe they would only be "shooting nukes" but flying planes in general. As far as I understand, most of the nukes would of been delivered by bombers, not missles, and certainly not ICBMs.

And not to mention that the north and south poles could potentially have usable water ways or land bridges when playing on a non-earth-like planet.

quote: And of course the entire map system should be changed to accomodate something of improbable utility

No, it should be changed because it's antiquated.

quote: how often will the two superpowers be directly across the poles from each other?

Given the nature of a sphere, quite often.

	17-06-2005 05:56									#54
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Why? it's a board game. Changing the zoom and angle isn't going to help you see anything on a two dimensional plane. If anything, it will only make it more difficult to see.

Some people find it easier to use the isometric view; others prefer going back to the original top-down. And zooming definately does help you see things on a two-dimensional map...

quote: Given the nature of a sphere, quite often.

Actually, given the nature of a sphere, it's the least likely arrangement.

quote: I don't believe they would only be "shooting nukes" but flying planes in general. As far as I understand, most of the nukes would of been delivered by bombers, not missles, and certainly not ICBMs.

Civ has never had nuclear bombers though, and there's no reason to think it would.

And I don't think run-of-the-mill strategic bombing was cost-effective over the poles.

quote: And not to mention that the north and south poles could potentially have usable water ways or land bridges when playing on a non-earth-like planet.

Even if there's no continent, they'll be frozen over.

quote: No, it should be changed because it's antiquated.

Hexes are even more so.

	17-06-2005 06:03									#55
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker The lead designer of cIV and the AI guy for C3. Frankly, you might want to do a little research on the game before posting your opinion of it on a forum...

Why should I have to do research before I post? I thought that is why we have these forums so we could ask questions that we don't know about.

Anyways why would I have done the research on Soren on the first place? That had nothing to do with my origanl post.

	17-06-2005 06:04									#56
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Please lock this thread since it seems it has nothing to do with my origianl question. Some people are saying if they are or arn't excited, others are not.

Thread has lost it's point now. Might start it again later.

	17-06-2005 06:28									#57
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Kuciwalker Some people find it easier to use the isometric view; others prefer going back to the original top-down. And zooming definately does help you see things on a two-dimensional map...

Zooming in the fashion that you are in favor of doesn't really help. You only need two levels of zoom - a detailed view, and an overall view. More usefull are different map overlays.

quote: Actually, given the nature of a sphere, it's the least likely arrangement. Very few arrangments would have a path along the equator as the quickest route. You don't even have to pass the pole for a route to be shortened on a sphere where it can not possibly be represented on a cylinder.

Civ has never had nuclear bombers though, and there's no reason to think it would.[/quote]

It does have bombers, fighters, helicopters, paratroopers, and all other manors of air units, however, and there's no reason to think that Civ4 shouldn't expand it's horizons. (even though there's plenty of reasons to think that it won't)

quote: Even if there's no continent, they'll be frozen over.

Note that I said non-earth-like. The extent that they're frozen would be variable.

quote: Hexes are even more so.

Indeed. I don't think I mentioned anything about hexes, though... But since you have, they are atleast somewhat more flexible than the square grid system which was antiquated even before Civ1.

	17-06-2005 11:53									#58
	Full PM-box? Change here!

Civ4 will probably fall very short of meeting my expectations. I "was" excited about Civ4 before seeing the screenshots. I loved Civ2, CTP2 and Civ3. However, Civ4 map looks pathetic, if not outright ugly. Cities look bad. Forests look bad. Units are disproportionately tall. The new defense bonus system (the more a unit sits atop a mountain the more defense bonus it gets) is nice, but the promotion system may be overcomplicated. The global view looks bad. WYS/WYG city views could be much better.

The map is supposed to be realistic, but it looks not. Gridlike, maybe even more than civ3.

3D doesn't mean much for a game played on "maps". The number of zoom levels will not affect much. Poles, spherical world or whatever doesn't matter. I'm playing 4000BC to 1950, why would there be a global view anyway? It's ridiculous before the space age.

I wish they worked on the looks more carefully, but they rather focused on 3D, in terms of visuals.

I bought Pirates! (unfortunately graded 9.2 on gamespot), played 2 weeks or so and gave it away free to a friend. I'm afraid civ4 may have the same fate.

	17-06-2005 12:31									#59
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

The reason why cIIIv didn't meet the expectations and why it got that many bugs was because cIIIv was build on old engines.

cIV is being made from nothing.
It's not valid to say that you have low expections for cIV because you didn't like cIIIv since Firaxis has listened to the feedback on cIIIv and decided to not continue on the cIIIv engine.

Further: I see no reason why micromanagement has been removed. It's still there, if you want it. But if you don't want micromanagement you have ways to avoid it.

Though the new religion model, the promotions model, the civics model really come with more micromanagement possibilities.

Of course the units are large.
They were in cIv, cIIv and cIIIv as well.
You don't want to stare at the map looking for your units, do you?

Not being able to pass the poles? C'mon, that's not a reason to not like the game. you've never been able to pass the poles in any civ game to date.

Hate the game because it has a globe?

Please, come with better reasons to not like what you've seen in the cIV previews.

	17-06-2005 13:17									#60
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by ISTANBUL Civ4 will probably fall very short of meeting my expectations. I "was" excited about Civ4 before seeing the screenshots. I loved Civ2, CTP2 and Civ3. However, Civ4 map looks pathetic, if not outright ugly. Cities look bad. Forests look bad. Units are disproportionately tall. The new defense bonus system (the more a unit sits atop a mountain the more defense bonus it gets) is nice, but the promotion system may be overcomplicated. The global view looks bad. WYS/WYG city views could be much better. The map is supposed to be realistic, but it looks not. Gridlike, maybe even more than civ3. 3D doesn't mean much for a game played on "maps". The number of zoom levels will not affect much. Poles, spherical world or whatever doesn't matter. I'm playing 4000BC to 1950, why would there be a global view anyway? It's ridiculous before the space age. I wish they worked on the looks more carefully, but they rather focused on 3D, in terms of visuals. I bought Pirates! (unfortunately graded 9.2 on gamespot), played 2 weeks or so and gave it away free to a friend. I'm afraid civ4 may have the same fate.

Who in his right mind would judge about a turn based strategy game based solely on graphics? Graphics is fluff, not more.

Whaaaaaa whaaaaa I don't like chess because I can't stand the look of the rook. It looks like a buttplug! . And the bishop, which isn't even close to how a real bishop looks. And alternately colored squares are teh suck!!1!