 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Mahdimael
|
 |
Sandy Eigo, CA, USA
May 2001
time: 05:15
|
|
I disagree with the column as well. From what I've seen, MOO3 seems like a much more complicated game than Civ3. Accessibility is one of the main keys of any game. If you can't work with the interface, you can easily lose interest in any game. Look at Civ 1: they didn't an in-game load menu. This was to discourage people from reloading any time something bad happened. But it was also inconvenient to load a game from inside the game.
Similarly, if a game is complicated, it will be less accessible. Have you looked at the MOO3 site? There's about 20 different options for each of religion, politics, etc etc. That's a sharp learning curve to master. Now look at Civ3. A clean and similar interface to what we've seen in Civ2.
I hope MOO3 is fun. It seems like it's trying to do too much. Civ3, on the other hand, is looking to keep what's worked as well as adding some intruiging new game concepts.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
yin26
|
 |
This space reserved for Darkstar.
Apr 1999
time: 14:15
|
|
Comrade:
quote:
CIV3 will either fail ignominiously, or half-succeed boringly. Even in the best case, I am afraid it is going to make me yawn. |
I think somebody stole my computer and wrote an article! This is EXACTLY how I feel, and I think you put it quite perfectly.
quote:
About the author: When I started to play strategy games, designer creativity was limited by computer power; now, computer power is limited by designer creativity |
I also really like that point. There is almost no limit to what can be creatively done...making a marginal release these days look all the more suspect.
Paul:
I go back and forth in my mind on that issue. In Age of Kings, for example, we ran though many ideas about supply lines and maximum range, etc. But in the end, people just generally wanted to build stuff and move it.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the new resource model require at least that you have supplies on-hand to build various units? I also read that perhaps if roads to the capitol are cut, you lose access to the resources?
Anyway, I like your suggestions, though. I think they could work in a TBS like Civ and would add an interesting (if sometimes frustrating) element to a tired formula.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
d_dudy
|
|
he's right, civ3.com needs way more info but i think culture is a fine improvement.
and yes, paul, you are taking it too seriously
|
|
| |
|
|
|
dennis580
|
|
It's a shame when I first started visiting this site back in January I thought Yin26 was the MVP(Most Valuable Person) of this board. I really like his hard nose approach and thought he really cared about making Civ3 a better game.
Yin has completely changed. I think he has reach such a point that he gets such a erotic high out of griping and complaining that he no longer really cares about the quality of Civ3. I find it sad and disturbing that Yin has reached this point.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
dainbramaged13
|
|
Dumbass
Mar 2000
time: 00:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by d_dudy
he's right, civ3.com needs way more info but i think culture is a fine improvement.
|
youre absolutely right about that. culture really improves the game, how else could you actually implement it? also, you forgot the resource system (it IS new, because they are resources that actually exist and can be traded, not that are either food/shield/trade improvements or random texts in the city window) and the greatly re-worked dimplomacy system, to name only a few of the 'NEW' things... there are also tons of minor things, not just 'a few.' The problem is comparing it with moo3, which has millions of new things.... you have to realize... moo3 is NOT the norm, it is the EXCEPTION, and a very large exception because of all the innovations it is making.
quote:
and yes, paul, you are taking it too seriously |
you are! its a nice idea, but in my mind, it wouold be too complicated a system not tohave holes and 'cheating strategies' to go along with it... maybe for moo3 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mech Assassin
|
 |
and a Finnish Assassin in Time.
Aug 2000
time: 07:15
|
|
Well, there was a huge Hype article on Civ 3 in Finnish Pelit magazine (Pelit=Games in English). It's an interview of Sid. So, they're not so secretive. You'll just have to look the right places.
Here are few things, mentioned there:
-AI is not going to cheat, except on Impossible difficulty
-You'll have 6 ways to victory (world domination, spaceship to Alpha Centauri, your effect on the history of the world (your total overall all-aged power in the histograph (Eqypt, Rome or Greek would probably be victorious in our real world), make your capitol the culture power of the world (have 6 culture points, which, according to the game desingers is much harder than it sounds like) or create super military power (hurray! When it's clear, that you'll win easily the rest of the world, you don't have to go on a conquest and spend time)
-You can't see the natural resources before you've done the research, needed to use it (your capitol might be in the center of the world's richest Uranium source, but you don't know of it, until your scientists have splitted their atoms)
-You can capture enemy's workers and settlers for free to be your slave power
-Democraties and Republics are always negative towards slavery and will probably attack you, if you use slave power, but dictatures don't care
-You'll need the 30 different natural resources in the game to build units (swordmen need steel to be built and railroad needs coal)
-You can trade those items with other civilization, but enemies, you're in war with can block your trade routes. You can also try to capture resources with war
-To use some resources, it needs to be in the area of one of your cities and you connect to it with road or if it's not at the aream you can build a mining colony (you'll lose the worker, when doing this) and connect that with road to all cities, you want to be able to use it
-You can turn the excess producion to money with trade
-From the large mountains, you can see larger area
-There are 4 experience levels (rookie-elite). Elites can advance to group leaders. They have 2 functions. 1, they can rush everything, that's being built in a city and 2, they can lead unit armies (up to 4 units). Before they can kill units in an army, they'll have to beat every of them
-There are national units for every civilization. They're stronger than normal units and victories with them will trigger a golden age for your civilization for 25 years. It'll double producion in all cities. Every nation can have 1 of these during it's history
-There's a new way to make deals in diplomacy (you still have the old talk, but the deals are made in a new desk). It's like in AC human-human multiplayer diplomacy. You make offers, computer makes offers and you either accept or decline. You can ask, what they want for something or would they accept something or things like that, so that you don't anger them with stupid suggestions (surrender or die (you can make that kind of suggestion), for example). A nation with good culture has better position in discussions than the ones with poor culture
-Settler costs 2 food to create and it can only make cities. Roads and such are build by workers, that cost 1 food
-When city's culture-meter fills, it's area grows up. When 2 cities meet, the one with greater culture melds the other one to it. Strong cultural cities can even turn weaker enemy cities to your side
-The citizens in conquered areas will retain their national identity. They can even rebel and make revolution against the conqueror even after peace treaty. You can however do ethnic cleaning by annihilating the former population and replacing it with your own
-Enemies don't go to wars without reasons, but they fight them to gain something (like they try to gain oil (conquer your oil fields), if they're running short of it and you don't sell it to them, but you have it)
-Your own aggressivity affects how easily computer will provoke aggression against you
-Prolonged attack rises the global unhappiness of your people, while succesfully repelled attacks increase happiness
PS. Sid cancelled Dinosaur game some time ago and they're now concentrating fully on Civ3 (for those, who didn't know)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
paulmagusnet
|
|
Boulder Creek,CA,USA
Nov 2000
time: 05:15
|
|
I find that such unrealistic things such as that are not fun, unless it is a game about magical realms, in which case teleporting units make sense. Units should really just begin making their way home at best speed. Working with rational limitations is what makes this genre of game fun, working without some limitations is what makes 'magic' based games fun.
Paul: a point of reality, and something I've wondered about when my expolring unit halfway round the world gets pinned to the coast by a couple of foreign units. I've sometimes gotten my units home by sending them into somebody's city radius, whereupon I can have them magically teleported home. How realistic is that?
I like the idea of resources as explained, especially that there will be hidden resources to be found at some rational point. But being able to split an atom doesn't mean that you can find uranium, it just means that suddenly it is important to find it. The ability to find it, refine it and seperate the useful isotopes are entirely seperate issues. This brings up an issue about the simplicity of the tech tree. It is not sophisticated enough to allow exclusive choices (directions that exclude other brances) and refinements of particular areas. For example, if I devote a lot of resources to develope geology I can be better at finding and extracting some resources. Conversely, I don't need to be able to manufature chips and computers to be able to use them or have an internet. Also once some one has discovered someting, it is easier for everyone else to learn about it, especially if you can steal or buy a prototype. Knowing about someting is not the same as being Good at doing it, the Soviet Union could make IC chips too, they were just so awful as to be useless. I know, my friends looked at the technology. Your civilization may be unable to use what you know or unwilling (look up the term 'Luddite'). In short, my feeling is that it should be easier to research a technology you know exists and harder to fully implement it (In Moo2 you could improve your ability to implement tech). Your first hydro dam should be difficult and expensive to build, your 20th should be a lot easier, the same with units. At level one Geology you might be using a dowsing stick to find water, at level V your computer imaging ground penetrating unit finds multiple minerals on the fly and gives you stock quotes. The KGB was notoriously good at stealing tech, but the Soviet sociaty was unable to use it. For example, they bought an expensive milling machine from the Japanese and tried (as usual) to duplicate it, and couldn't, destroying the device in the process of the failed reverse engineering.
One nice thing about CTP are the economic units, and as usual it's badly implimented. It would be great to borrow from MOO2 the ability to insert non military quasi-unites into enemy cities to perform special effects. Spies, assassins, evangulists and traders would be just a few of these types. They should not be moble units like the army units, but simply assigned to a target, given a mission and have maintenance paid for.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Mech Assassin
|
|
and a Finnish Assassin in Time.
Aug 2000
time: 07:15
|
|
Yes, well I guess, the important thing is noticing the resources and knowing, what they're good for. For example, if you know about the Uranium stock, but you don't know, what Uranium is or even less, how it could be used, you wouldn't give much notice to it. But, after you know that your nuclear facilities depend on Uranium (+ Plutonium and so on, but let's stick to the subject) and you could identify the mineral, you'd probably get your interest rate towards it risen...
But, I agree that the technology system should be more like developing new technology, then developing some practical uses for it.
I agree with you on the realism point. Realism is important on realistic games and make them far better. For example, how come, your fighters or AA are unable to destroy enemy paradrop planes? How come, SAM Site can't defend on it's own. It also needs something like a Tank to help... Or Coastal Fortress for that matter...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
ElmoTheElk
|
 |
Leiden, The Netherlands
Jul 2000
time: 06:15
|
|
Hey civers,
It just seems we can see 2 types of TBS games in the future.
- Die-hard realistic tbs games (with aim to detail)
- Open-for-all-players not-always-realistic tbs games (With aim to gameplay)
It just a personal taste that makes you believe one is better than another. It's not that MOO3 is better than Civ3, or the other way around, it's just what type of player you are.
I like gameplay orientated more, just because I want to step into a game and play, without always having to concentrate on all the aspects that detailed games bring with them.
On the other hand, I see use in some more realistic features in tbs games. Things like culture and probably even supply routes make sense to me. However, if all the ideas of The List (with Civ3 ideas, find it on the Apolyton website) are included in a tbs game, it will be horrible to play. About no one can ever manage all these aspects simultaneous.
Can't stand to make a quick step to Guns, Germs and Steel. The open source tbs-civlike game that I some other fanatic gamers are trying to make. We often have to choose between realism and gameplay, trying to combine them as much as we can, but we often have to draw a line. And with multiple people in a team, this causes discussion. Heated discussion sometimes, and it will slow down the development of the game.
Eventually we will succeed in design all the aspects of a tbs game. It will take some times, but designers often have to make a choice between realism and gameplay, between details and macromanagement,...
... between MOO3 and Civ3.
There is 1 thing that is the dame for both games though, I can't wait for them being released.
Greets,
ElmoTheElk (webmaster/artist/designer Guns, Germs and Steel)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Don K Hotay
|
|
Boston
Aug 2001
time: 00:15
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by ElmoTheElk
Can't stand to make a quick step to Guns, Germs and Steel.....
ElmoTheElk (webmaster/artist/designer Guns, Germs and Steel) |
Thats real cool how you mentioned a really really very very great book, by Jared Diamond. I wanted to mention months ago that CIV3 should implement features based on the astounding amount of information covered in this book. In what reference did you mention it though?
Its a great read for those wondering why civs are the way they are...very informative.
Quixote
"Location, Location, Location...", Jared Diamond Guns, Germs, and Steel
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:15.
Apolyton Time is 00:15. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-09-2001 02:57
Is it anything wrong with the link, or is it my computer?!
I have trust in Civ3 and Firaxis, maybe that is wrong, but I don't think so...
, and I don't think I can write anything more that is constructive...
|