 |
| |
|
|
yin26
|
 |
This space reserved for Darkstar.
Apr 1999
time: 14:18
|
|
I've been keeping loose tabs on the progress, and I know a few video interviews and screens can't tell the whole story, but the game just looks ...well... childish. Hard to think of a better word. HUGE, cartoony "units" slogging it out on goofy maps. Christ. They just don't get how to make maps, do they? I'm focused on the look of the game, of course, because I've heard NOTHING that suggest anything significantly changed in gameplay.
Seems so far like a kind of finger painter's version of checkers. Maybe the masses need the pointless graphics, but all I really see is a touch-up to a Civ 3 mess. Firaxis' motto these days seems to be: "Why innovate?" Pirates 2. Civ 4. -- None of which was crafted by Sid himself. When they went down the path of something new (Dinos), they hit the abort button.
Can't wait for CPU Bach 2 (3D!) to be coded by a couple of interns. http://www.gamespot.com/features/sidlegacy/cpubach.html
The last time that formula worked was when Sid turned Civ 2 over to Brian Reynolds. Problem is, Brian is a superstar. Speaking of, anybody seen what Rise of Legends is doing with graphics? There's a case where the graphics upgrades actually look to add something significant to the game...not to mention that BHG seems determined to push the envelope a little bit. Firaxis on the other hand reminds me of a bunch of old ladies thinking that making 2's wild instead of 3's has somehow revolutionized their Sunday game of Go Fish.
So, we seem to have the following progression:
Civ 1 --> Civ 2 --> Civ 2.5 --> (and now) Civ 2.7 By my account, we'll have a true Civ 3 released in 2012 -- but only after a hostile take over of the Civ franchise by BHG.
Hate to say it: Civ is dead.
Yin
Last edited by yin26 on 10-07-2005 at 03:15
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Solver
|
|
Apolyton Duke Of Something
|
 |
Latvia, Riga
Sep 2000
time: 07:18
|
|
Excellent, finally your pessimistic stuff has returned. I was getting worried  .
Judging that there is no innovation in Civ4 by graphics is, well, superficial. Yes, the game looks cartoony, but that doesn't mean it has gameplay wrong. In fact, we know of several gameplay innovations such as Religion, Great persons, a changed maintenance system, health, an overhauled combat system, promotions, more resources and, of course, excellent modding abilities. That, I would say, is quite a huge improvement list over Civ3.
Face it, you're focused on the looks because that's all you have seen  .
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yin26
|
|
This space reserved for Darkstar.
Apr 1999
time: 14:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Solver
In fact, we know of several gameplay innovations such as Religion, Great persons, a changed maintenance system, health, an overhauled combat system, promotions, more resources and, of course, excellent modding abilities. |
Hey you guys. Glad my gloom and doom is still welcome(?)! 
I'm not sure how those are innovations:
Religion just seems an added layer to "the outsider" stuff. You know...you conquer city of another civ and it takes a while to become part of your kingdom. Religion here seems a variation on a theme...a minor distration or simple subgame at best, most likely to be ignored midway through your first play unless you just like to micromanage stuff that the computer isn't programmed to use itself anyway.
Same with great persons. We already had great leaders that did nothing other than give odd bonuses to a broken combat system. Now you get a tech bonus or a golden age if you mix and match them? Wow!  I'd rather just stick with Magic the Gathering and mix/match my cards in some really wonderful ways! (Note: Never played that game but love the Yugioh [sp?] cartoon...the suspense of which cards to play!)
And from what I understand of maintenance, health, combat and promotions, there is only a tweaking of a formula. Nothing new. So now we see "units" in triplicate, with all their defense added together, in the name of simplicity and graphic excitement? So now we know "a rating of 8 is stronger than a rating of 4" --a rough quote from Firaxis. Wow. Stop the presses.
As for modding, we've heard those promises a million times only to run against a game so flawed that the best we can hope for are Snoopy's shruken graphics and some scenarios titled "Electrifying Elephant Bonanza" and "Great People Gone Bad."
Seems like I'll be waiting three years to see if Poly can save yet another Civ game. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Solver
|
|
Apolyton Duke Of Something
|
|
Latvia, Riga
Sep 2000
time: 07:18
|
|
quote:
Religion just seems an added layer to "the outsider" stuff. You know...you conquer city of another civ and it takes a while to become part of your kingdom. Religion here seems a variation on a theme...a minor distration or simple subgame at best, most likely to be ignored midway through your first play unless you just like to micromanage stuff that the computer isn't programmed to use itself anyway. |
Religion sounds to be more complex than that and to have more interesting consequences than merely taking time to adapt after you conquer it. Saying that the AI can't cope with it is your classic pessimsm, how can you already predict the AI is going to be so bad without playing the game?
quote:
Same with great persons. We already had great leaders that did nothing other than give odd bonuses to a broken combat system. Now you get a tech bonus or a golden age if you mix and match them? Wow! I'd rather just stick with Magic the Gathering and mix/match my cards in some really wonderful ways! (Note: Never played that game but love the Yugioh [sp?] cartoon...the suspense of which cards to play!) |
From what we hear, there are no military great leaders anymore, but the new ones actually sound flexible. You have numerous options what to do with a great person. And I'm sure that they're not too easy to get so you won't break the game balance with them. What needs to be done is to have some sort of expense for getting them. If that's in, good.
quote:
And from what I understand of maintenance, health, combat and promotions, there is only a tweaking of a formula. Nothing new. So now we see "units" in triplicate, with all their defense added together, in the name of simplicity and graphic excitement? So now we know "a rating of 8 is stronger than a rating of 4" --a rough quote from Firaxis. Wow. Stop the presses. |
Health is new. Combat system isn't quite like Civ3, because Soren said you need mixed arms, something that was never the case in previous Civ games. Promotions are new too, and if there are 42 of them, that will allow for more versatility than in previous games. Oh, I forgot Civics, too.
quote:
As for modding, we've heard those promises a million times only to run against a game so flawed that the best we can hope for are Snoopy's shruken graphics and some scenarios titled "Electrifying Elephant Bonanza" and "Great People Gone Bad." |
This time we don't have promises, but rather precise info - all game data being stored in XML and Python being used as a scripting language, so you can mod it. Plus, Soren promised the entire AI code open at E3. That's more than promises of "great moddability".
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
yin26
|
|
This space reserved for Darkstar.
Apr 1999
time: 14:18
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Solver
Religion sounds to be more complex than that and to have more interesting consequences than merely taking time to adapt after you conquer it. Saying that the AI can't cope with it is your classic pessimsm, how can you already predict the AI is going to be so bad without playing the game? |
Experience, I guess. Civ has never been able to conquer the fact that most human players win by economies of scale. These other things, which might be interesting the first several turns when every little bit counts, will get washed away as always when city 100 happens to be a different religion. Who cares?
quote:
From what we hear, there are no military great leaders anymore, but the new ones actually sound flexible. You have numerous options what to do with a great person. And I'm sure that they're not too easy to get so you won't break the game balance with them. What needs to be done is to have some sort of expense for getting them. If that's in, good. |
Dunno. Just sounds like fluff to me. A side show.
quote:
Health is new. Combat system isn't quite like Civ3, because Soren said you need mixed arms, something that was never the case in previous Civ games. Promotions are new too, and if there are 42 of them, that will allow for more versatility than in previous games. Oh, I forgot Civics, too. |
How do mixed arms work in the framework of what we're seeing in the videos? If that's really a part of the game (and not hype), then that's a good thing. As for promotions, again, nothing new. If Firaxis wants to add RPG elements to Civ, that's fine, but it should commit to them fully and not just throw around meaningless production bonuses, etc.
quote:
This time we don't have promises, but rather precise info - all game data being stored in XML and Python being used as a scripting language, so you can mod it. Plus, Soren promised the entire AI code open at E3. That's more than promises of "great moddability". |
What I mean by hype is that "We have an awesome game, but we'll let you mod it, if you like." If the game can be completely re-written by Poly, then there is hope. But like I said, I think it will take about three years or so for the game to be A) in the bargain bin with at least 2 patches (one after the initial release then the X-pack) to fix stuff that we *CAN'T* mod and B) for the modders to finally fix the mess.
I mean, I saw "Civ3 Complete" the other day basically for free and honestly thought to myself: Oxymoron.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
yin26
|
|
This space reserved for Darkstar.
Apr 1999
time: 14:18
|
|
curtsibling: To some degree, you have a point. As long as we stay with the old Civ formulas, I won't be happy. That's true. But we've already had 3 releases of basically the same formula, so why not either let the series die a good death (you know, retire and stay retired with a little dignity) or take it in a bold new direction? -- I could describe a bold new direction, but so could anybody else, so I won't waste time.
Don't get me wrong: Making Civ 2.7 is safe marketing scheme. Lots of people unfamiliar with the game will see the goofy graphics and blow their money. Sid's name, once again, will cause people to buy the game even if he did nothing to design it.
Problem here is, it seems, Firaxis can only play this sad music so many times before the gaming public tunes out. No worries, of course. Plenty of other games out there.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Solver
|
|
Apolyton Duke Of Something
|
|
Latvia, Riga
Sep 2000
time: 07:18
|
|
quote:
Experience, I guess. Civ has never been able to conquer the fact that most human players win by economies of scale. These other things, which might be interesting the first several turns when every little bit counts, will get washed away as always when city 100 happens to be a different religion. Who cares? |
There you make several assumptions. 1. In Civ4, having lots of cities will be a defining factor. We don't know that. It sure was so previously, but if ICS is finally killed in Civ4, that will not be the case anymore. 2. Economics of scale are unrelated to religion. Firstly, sure economics are important. But, it's plausible that religion plays a role in your economics, a role large enough where it matters whether you ignore religion or not.
quote:
Dunno. Just sounds like fluff to me. A side show. |
But you could say that about a lot, really. Wonders, unit upgrades, military alliances. One way to look at the game is that it's a wargame. Then all you need is Settlers, Workers, military techs and your best attack unit + Barracks. In that case, almost everything becomes a side show.
quote:
How do mixed arms work in the framework of what we're seeing in the videos? If that's really a part of the game (and not hype), then that's a good thing. As for promotions, again, nothing new. If Firaxis wants to add RPG elements to Civ, that's fine, but it should commit to them fully and not just throw around meaningless production bonuses, etc. |
The videos don't really show much except that we have seen different units doing combat. However, if Firaxis set their minds on it, then making mixed arms a requirement of succesfull wars isn't the hardest thing to do. And what does fully commiting to RPG elements mean? A D&D style ability sheet for each unit  ? Promotions give bonuses vs. some sorts of units, or special abilities. That way, your Knight without promotions will be different to a Knight with one promotion which will be different to a Knight with three. Sounds like a working system to me, and very different from Civ3, where you invaded with a dozen Knights and reinforcements of another dozen Knights arrived shortly.
quote:
What I mean by hype is that "We have an awesome game, but we'll let you mod it, if you like." If the game can be completely re-written by Poly, then there is hope. But like I said, I think it will take about three years or so for the game to be A) in the bargain bin with at least 2 patches (one after the initial release then the X-pack) to fix stuff that we *CAN'T* mod and B) for the modders to finally fix the mess. |
That's the most pessimistic view you could possibly say. A messed up game that needed mods was CtP2 - and yes the mods did make it brilliant but that's another subject. You're just assuming that Civ4 will suck so much that it will be awful without mods that change everything about the game. Bah. However, good modding tools for a good game is obviously a great thing, I hope you won't argue against that .
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Solver
|
|
Apolyton Duke Of Something
|
|
Latvia, Riga
Sep 2000
time: 07:18
|
|
quote:
curtsibling: To some degree, you have a point. As long as we stay with the old Civ formulas, I won't be happy. That's true. But we've already had 3 releases of basically the same formula, so why not either let the series die a good death (you know, retire and stay retired with a little dignity) or take it in a bold new direction? -- I could describe a bold new direction, but so could anybody else, so I won't waste time. |
But that's the problem exactly, if they change the formulas radically, it will not be Civ anymore. Look at how many of us there are here, terribly addicted to Civ. It's hard to think of many games fans of which are as addicted and devoted as Civ. If they change the formulas, we'll have a game that is no longer Civ. It might still be good. But it will be like RoN, like RTW, or whatever. Won't be civ anymore.
What Firaxis is doing is adding new things and tweaking the game within the Civ context. The basic Civ formulas, the core concept of the game works very well. That's what made Civ1 a success. So if they get the othre changes right, we have a darn excellent game on our hands.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Solver
|
|
Apolyton Duke Of Something
|
|
Latvia, Riga
Sep 2000
time: 07:18
|
|
The series has not run its course because people are still playing the game. That's the difference with Civ. You see a player play 5 games, then 10, then more and more. Veterans have three digit numbers of games, some Civ2 players have more than that, I think. And that is with the length of a Civ game, which is, well, you know what!
So Civ4 brings some new feautures and brings some novelty in this. New stuff, new strats, new gameplay elements. And if it's good, players will enjoy playing Civ for the 10th and for the 100th time.
It doesn't really happen with other games, people get bored of them more quickly. There are, though, a few games so brilliant in their design, implementation or whatever that they are still played for years. Besides Civ, there's Age of Empires II, which is 6 years old and with a very active MP community, or Starcraft for which the same is true, only it's even older.
It really sounds to me like you don't want a Civ game at all. It sounds like you want a game of another genre or subgenre, call it what you will. Care to summarize briefly what your ideas are about what you want to see?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Kuciwalker
|
 |
of Schmooism
Feb 2001
time: 00:18
|
|
quote:
Experience, I guess. Civ has never been able to conquer the fact that most human players win by economies of scale. |
 therefore civ has ALWAYS been dead!
quote:
Dunno. Just sounds like fluff to me. A side show. |
Because we all know leaders were just fluff, a side show, in Civ3.
Oh wait.
quote:
Health is new. Combat system isn't quite like Civ3, because Soren said you need mixed arms, something that was never the case in previous Civ games. Promotions are new too, and if there are 42 of them, that will allow for more versatility than in previous games. Oh, I forgot Civics, too. |
quote:
How do mixed arms work in the framework of what we're seeing in the videos? If that's really a part of the game (and not hype), then that's a good thing. As for promotions, again, nothing new. If Firaxis wants to add RPG elements to Civ, that's fine, but it should commit to them fully and not just throw around meaningless production bonuses, etc. |
Eh, you obviously have no clue what the promotions are about if you think they have to do with production bonuses... there are complete newbies here less woefully uninformed as you. And you didn't even respond to the fact that pollution and corruption have been completely replaced. That's a huge change from all of the civs before.
quote:
What I mean by hype is that "We have an awesome game, but we'll let you mod it, if you like." If the game can be completely re-written by Poly, then there is hope. But like I said, I think it will take about three years or so for the game to be A) in the bargain bin with at least 2 patches (one after the initial release then the X-pack) to fix stuff that we *CAN'T* mod and B) for the modders to finally fix the mess. |
We're going to be able to mod the game code. This is any modder's wet dream.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yin26
|
|
This space reserved for Darkstar.
Apr 1999
time: 14:18
|
|
If ICS isn't still the dominant strategy in Civ 4, then I'll eat (at least part) of the cardboard box! And if combat isn't as dull as ever, I'll eat more parts!
The question, of course, is: "But if you 'fix' these things, is it still Civ?" Maybe not, but then I just have to say that what was exciting and new a decade or more ago will naturally be (by many people) run through the paces until there's no more blood to be squeezed from the rock. So I guess that's what we have: More of the same, and for those of you who can't get enough of it, great!
Since you asked, I'd make the battle portions of Civ 4 real-time or do something like you see in Heroes of Might and Magic. You know. Give me something TO DO once the battle actually starts! I'd also introduce some kind of other limitations (like the number of people allowed in your royal court in Knights of Honor) to make it logically more difficult to wage world-wide wars so effectively. Then I'd do something like you see in Supreme Ruler 2010 where you can appoint cabinet members who have specific political leanings, which can be of use during specific political turmoils.
The theme there is: Make me think a little more! That's all I'm saying. The core of Civ is great, but we figured this thing out a LONG LONG time ago!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Solver
|
|
Apolyton Duke Of Something
|
|
Latvia, Riga
Sep 2000
time: 07:18
|
|
quote:
If ICS isn't still the dominant strategy in Civ 4, then I'll eat (at least part) of the cardboard box! And if combat isn't as dull as ever, I'll eat more parts! |
I'll print this thread, and you'll post a video of eating the box on Apolyton .
If you fix ICS and combat, it's still Civ. But if you make parts of it real-time, it's no longer Civ. I really have a problem with anyone who suggests making battles real time. I don't want any real time elements, I don't want reflexes to have any meaning in Civ! There are tons of real-time or partially real-time games on the market, from the abovementioned great oldies like AOE2 to RoN and Rome Total War. Yet there are very few good turn based games.
What you do once the battle starts is hope your unit wins. I'm sure the combat animation can be turned off, then a battle will take less than a second.
Appointing cabinet members is sort of like changing civics. You've got 3125 possible government options in Civ4. If that isn't enough stuff to do for you, I don't know what is.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yin26
|
|
This space reserved for Darkstar.
Apr 1999
time: 14:18
|
|
Sure. One idea I would like to see is, for example, once you get a certain number of cities, you actually lose city-by-city control and move to a city-state interface (somewhat like Europa Universalis or Knights of Honor). The city model works well early when you are exploring, etc., but is then too open to tedium and abuse mid-game forward.
So, yes, if that were remedied in Civ, that would warrant a purchase of the game for this old, tired, negative force.
Edit: But nowhere in the screens I've seen does anything look different about cities.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:18.
Apolyton Time is 00:18. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-07-2005 01:40
|