 |
|  |
 |
|
dainbramaged13
|
|
Dumbass
Mar 2000 time: 00:14
|
|
The #1 problem with these civ3 forums is that there are so many people on here who believe that the civ series was and is supposed to b a simulation of history and the real world. SORRY TO SAY GUYS, BUT THIS ISN'T TRUE! Civ and its successors are supposed to be FUN above all else, while trying to incorporate realism into it, because as it happens, the fact of realism does add an element to fun. BUT - the number ONE aspect of civ is FUN, NOT REALISM, and that is what some of us ned to remind ourselves when we post here. ALSO the game cannot be too complicated. par example: korn469's M.A.D. idea. I agree with him that MAD should be included in the game, but the complexity with which he wanted it included could be another game on its own, or at least a modpack in civ, but not part of the game. the amount of time spent on each feature, i believe, is pretty large, and therefore, such complicated things cannot and shouldn't, for the sake of balance, be included in the game.
This is also a reason why firaxians do not post here often, because they are afraid.
that is all
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
To_Serve_Man
|
 |
Albany, NY, USA
Apr 1999 time: 00:14
|
|
quote: Originally posted by dainbramaged13
The #1 problem with these civ3 forums is that there are so many people on here who believe that the civ series was and is supposed to b a simulation of history and the real world. SORRY TO SAY GUYS, BUT THIS ISN'T TRUE! Civ and its successors are supposed to be FUN above all else, while trying to incorporate realism into it, because as it happens, the fact of realism does add an element to fun. BUT - the number ONE aspect of civ is FUN, NOT REALISM, and that is what some of us ned to remind ourselves when we post here. ALSO the game cannot be too complicated. par example: korn469's M.A.D. idea. I agree with him that MAD should be included in the game, but the complexity with which he wanted it included could be another game on its own, or at least a modpack in civ, but not part of the game. the amount of time spent on each feature, i believe, is pretty large, and therefore, such complicated things cannot and shouldn't, for the sake of balance, be included in the game.
This is also a reason why firaxians do not post here often, because they are afraid.
that is all |
In total agreement...
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
Since I have been saying hold on guy almost from the start, this Thread is going to be one of the best thread ever. This game is going to one of the best ever, if everyone would give it a chance.
And since a lot of people will not read every post here, let me mention that Computer Gaming World still has Aug 2001 listed as the release date. If the game was 50% a month ago and is 85% two weeks ago, how far along are they now?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ecthy
|
|
Zhonghuà Rénmín Gònghéguó
Mar 2000 time: 06:14
|
|
what is mad?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
korn469
|
 |
Poetic Justic
Apr 1999 time: 00:14
|
|
M.A.D. is a cold war term that means mutually assured destruction, which basically means everyone dies in the event of a nuclear war
quote: so yea i do think that we all kind of got carried away with how to implement nuclear weapons in the game but i think it boils down to this
Civ3 has to have ICBMs with infinate range, that can do massive damage to a city if not destroy it outright, and ICBMs have to have a target, once one ICBM gets launched they all hit their targets simultaneously (ie it's too late for diplomacy) and SDI has to be balanced accordingly so that it only increases the chance of surviving a nuclear war but doesnt make nuclear war obsolete |
i admited that i got carried away, but i still think that MAD and nuclear war being a bad thing is good for Civ3
what it boils down to is that many of us would like to see one certain feature set in civ3 get a major improvement because that is our favorite part of the game, or when we come up with a good idea that we do not think how to seemlessly integrate that idea into the rest of the game...however we are not getting paid to do that, we are simply consumers voicing our opinions of how to improve our past time
and i always TRY to make my ideas simple and civish but things don't always work out that way and if you asked ten people from apolyton what makes civ great you'd probably get ten completely different answers
still i am truly hoping that civ3 has some form of MAD in it and that Civ2/SMAC nukes are dead and gone replaced with something better
quote: (esp. from those in the crappy SMAC, CtP camp) |
uh steve you do realize that SMAC is really just AlphaCiv don't you? i really don't see why so many civ2 players hate SMAC when basically it just a sci fi version of civ2...is it just the genre? i mean really what was it about the actual gameplay (no arguments that have anything to do with genre at all) that made it SO much worse than civ2??
i mean if you play civ2, SMAC, AOK, and Counter Strike i think you'll be able to figure out which two games are similar and which games aren't like them at all...i still feel that SMAC is superior to Civ2 gameplay wise but that SMAC could have have been better and that although it beats civ2 but not hands down
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
Let me remind some of you, when Sid and company (Micro Prose)sat down to discussed the making of Civ 2, they talked about remaking Civ 1 or making SMAC. The final decision was of course to remake Civ 1 into Civ 2. I remember well, the magazine story about their decision. So SMAC is the Civs game that told the story of our Civilization after reaching AC.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
|
I was at Software Etc. (Fairfield, CA) today (6/9/01) and ask them to look up Civ 3 for the hex of it. Their computer had it listed for Oct. 2001 release.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:14. Apolyton Time is 00:14. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|