 |
| |
|
|
yin26
|
 |
This space reserved for Darkstar.
Apr 1999
time: 14:14
|
|
Since the term Civ 2.5 is being throw around and debated a lot lately, and since CyberShy asked who came up with this "stupid" term, I'd just like to take credit, since even if I'm stupid, I like to be good at it. 
This article is from October 6, 1999...that's like 25 years ago in 'Net Years,' I think. This was before Brian left Firaxis. I've cut out some of the stuff that won't be interesting anymore (references to inside jokes at the time, etc.). But it's an interesting look at things from nearly two years ago.
Some have questioned: How can I (and others) possibly use this term when we haven't played the game yet? To which I can only say:
** Have you seen the screenshots (which I pray are just alpha graphic placeholder, but who can tell)?
** Have you considered the lively and frequent updates making it clear that all these vague ideas actually have some kind of details to them? I missed those, too.
** Have you heard the great news about extensive beta testing and that "We won't ship until it's ready!" stuff? Please post the link if you have one.
** Have you paid attention to this industry at all?
Still, if people disagree with me and consider me a misguided pessimist, I can accept that. Let's just say I hope my pessimism is misplaced. And there is a slight possibility *cough* that Firaxis is cleverly holding back the good information to highten our suspense, being the sly and subtle PR masters they are, of course.
The Article: "Civ II.V?"
Like many of you out there, I'm very interested in what the next Civ will bring us. Frankly, I've grown tired of the Civ build-lots-of-cities-and-attack-one-unit-at-a-time formula. Don't get me wrong. I'm bored because I've played CivI and II to death, which is saying something quite good about these games and the people behind their creation.
......
http://www.gamespot.com/features/sidlegacy
......
For those of you who skipped the Gamespot article, let me summarize: Brian Reynolds, not Sid Meier, created CivII. While eating [muffins] and sipping tea in England, Brian Reynolds somehow did the impossible: He vastly improved a Sid Meier game (without much help from Sid). Sid, who wanted to avoid mental illness, shrewdly opted NOT to try to top his own creation, leaving CivII mainly to Brian Reynolds, who succeeded brilliantly.
......
Here's what the safe money says: Make Civ2.5 --- put in some great graphics, put in a few things players have asked for and you thought up yourself (but don't fundamentally change the game whatever you do), and watch the money roll in. Oh, and it WILL roll in. Most Civers are junkies. They can't resist the urge to buy a Civ game, especially one that looks and plays even a little bit better. Safe money says, "Don't rock the boat, Brian." Hmmm. Tempting. You begin to realize that a Civ2.5 would be SO much easier to put together-and it's money in the bank. Yes, Civ 2.5 sounds great. And Civ fans rejoice...
Some Civ fans, that is. As I said up top, a Civ 2.5 just won't interest me. "But it has a 45 minute introductory movie that even Hollywood has nominated for an Emmy in a new category: Best Computer Short! 'Ely outdid himself!' says Entertainment Tonight." I don't care. "But the music is so good Capitol Records is releasing a music CD titled 'Civilisensational'! 'Briggs is a musical genius!' says the London Philharmonic!" Well, maybe I'll just buy the music. "But the A.I. is WAY better-the CPU only trades for empty cities 50% of the time! 'Pure programming genius!' lauds Susan Meier!" O.K., that one almost got me.
Ultimately, I don't think a Civ 2.5 interests Brian Reynolds, either. Brian never got the credit he deserved for basically putting Civ 2 together by himself. Think about that for a moment. The greatest game ever (well, many of us would say) was put together by Brian Reynolds. Sure, he built on a Sid Meier design, but what do people say? "You mean this masterpiece WASN'T made by Sid Meier? That's deceptive!" I can't imagine how much that must suck if you are Brian Reynolds. When is it gonna be Brian's turn, dammit?
So, does Brian really want to just seek out a Civ2.5? That's hard to imagine. He's just too young and too talented to accept that fate willingly. And, unlike before, people are starting to get the idea that Sid is actually out playing golf (he earned it, mind you-in fact, watch for "Sid Meier's Golf" one day in the future). Plus, Brian's got those suggestion lists put together at Apolyton and elsewhere. So many great ideas...so much potential...
......
Well, I'm not sure what we can expect from the next Civ game, but here's what Sid said when people pushed him to do Civ2:
quote:
I really sensed a danger that I didn't want to get into this 'topping myself every time' phenomenon. I saw mental illness down that road. I said I am not going to get in the business of topping Civilization and then trying to top what comes after Civilization. There lies madness. |
Well, you're in it now, Brian, so I say go down (or UP) fighting! Top yourself! Take Civ3 to an entirely new level! Show the world what you are capable of! This is it: The Civ Leagues! Besides, version 2 of the Apolyton list is coming to you soon, and that should make things so much easier. =)
Then again, that clock is ticking, and the quarterly financials just arrived...
I wish you the greatest success, Brian, whichever path you choose. If it matters, people know who made Civ 2 (but many are just still too shocked to talk about it in public). If creating Civ 3 ever causes you to start losing your grip, do what I occasionally do: Fire up Civ1, play for a few minutes, then fire up Civ2 and forget the world for a while. You might also try humming a few bars from "Revolution" (great Civ theme song, by the way). Helps me.
"You say you want a revolution
Well, you know
We all want to change the world..."
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Yin I believe sometimes the younger crowd (30-0) expect to much from a game. This gaming industry is still very young. In 1980 there wasn't even a picture in a game.. And then Roberta of Sierra said to Ken one day (82-83), let's put pictures in a game and see what happens.
Hey TV came out for the public in 1947/8 and we did not have color until 1960s. Full color in 1967/8.
Beside we just went digital 2 or 3 years ago. And CDs games have only be around since 1993/4.
Movies has been around since the late teens/twenties, but until the other great person from Modesto, Ca. George Lucas showed up, the movies did not have digital or THX tect.
Keep in mind, I have been buying games since 1984, and I believe they have come a long ways. Maybe it will be Civ 5 or 6 before they get it right, but that does not mean, they are not trying to do it right this time.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Hasdrubal
|
 |
Carthage.
May 2000
time: 05:14
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by yin26
Here's what the safe money says: Make Civ2.5 --- put in some great graphics, put in a few things players have asked for and you thought up yourself (but don't fundamentally change the game whatever you do), and watch the money roll in.
...
And Civ fans rejoice...
|
Well, I would rejoice, in fact...
I may be a conservative old fart, but I want a Civ game to feel, look and play like a Civ game. I don't want them to tamper with the fundamentals of the game! Much like I wouldn't want to have new rules of play at the beginning of each new football season - just bring in some youngsters.
I would be quite satisfied if the game would look fresh, would force me to develop new modes of play, would introduce new features and some unexpected novelties, would adress faults and generally feel like a new experience.
Don't get me wrong, it has to be a step up, i.e. it should take the concept further from Civ II than Civ II took it from Civ I. But Civ with altered fundamentals = a game like MOO, or MOM. Both are excellent games in their own right, who borrowed heavily from Civ and took the concept into new directions, but they were not Civ. And that is what I want Civ III to be - a Civ game.
BTW, that 'Sid Golf' prediction is really astounding 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000
time: 00:14
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by joseph1944
Yin I believe sometimes the younger crowd (30-0) expect to much from a game. This gaming industry is still very young. In 1980 there wasn't even a picture in a game.. |
They surely do expect too much. I bought lots of games from 1973 to 1979. I expected a nice map (no random ones!!!!) - (avalon hill had cardboard, SPI had paper with subdued colors), some well designed punch out counters with historically accurate attack, defense and movement factors, some clearly written rules that would model the historic situation well without being too difficult to learn or too burdensome to play, and a die (couldnt do much without a die)
No music, no sounds, no AI, no scenario editor, no random maps, graphics limited to the map itself - no animations, 3d, or whatever - well, you get the picture.
I bought my first game in 20 years in 1999, simcity2000. then a few more including Civ.
No wonder i sometimes feel lost in the "gaming community" They seem to demand things I dont expect, and seem willing to overlook things (in the historical accuracy arena) that drive me crazy!!!! Its just a game - well of course - but what is a game(i think) , if not a model of some historical situation? Whats the point of it all? If i wanted good gameplay i'd play chess. (they met just down the hall from us "strategy gamers") I played 1914, kingmaker, napoleon at waterloo, etc because the historical realism, the modeling, gave an immersive quality that chess, risk, go, etc did not have.
I realize that others came to computer strategy gaming by a different path - via video games, FPS's, etc. Or they started playing a game like the original civ. They have a different perspective. I just ask you to bear with me and those who share my obsessions.
LOTM
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
tniem
|
|
Hope College
Apr 2000
time: 00:14
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by yin26
Dan's recent exuse for not updating the Website ("We have TWO games in production..." blah blah blah) seems to support precisely what I argued above. Too bad, actually. |
I don't know. I still would have to believe that the reason Dan has not updated the website in a while is that they have no real news to report. They are testing making changes and what not and are leaving the hype to the gaming magazines and fan sites.
I can't believe it really has to do with no time.
It can't take long to add a little blurb about what magazine has given a new review, which is at the very least what they should be doing.
This new civ3 site may be the reason, but I still believe that the biggest thing is that they have nothing new to put up so they aren't releasing anything. Hopefully that leads to a later release date. After all if October was still on the table it would be time to start cranking up the hype within the next week...
|
|
| |
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-07-2001 05:38
|