 |
| |
|
|
civcop
|
|
Civ 3 will thrill a great many and yet cause others to grumble and complain. From, "There's no MP!" to "The AI sucks!", those who are umimpressed will compile a list of flaws with Civ 3 while those who appreciate it will laud its virtues.
It appears that the more "sophisticated" players are at least suspicious of Civ 3 (if they haven't already written it off as crap) and the more trusting and/or less demanding players hold out faith in Sid and Firaxis and will most likely enjoy the game. For the most critical, Civ 3 will be sub par no matter its features. The game could induce orgasms and they would still find something to complain about. What intrigues me as much or more than how the game will play is whether or not the harshest critics and most jaded players will eat crow if the game is actually good.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
quote:
What intrigues me as much or more than how the game will play is whether or not the harshest critics and most jaded players will eat crow if the game is actually good. |
I'm sure the gameplay will be good. I like what I've seen with respect to resources and culture. BUT
I'm concerned that instead of an improved AI, Firaxis has concentrated on animated leaders who for the most part look like clownshoes. (Exception: Lou Diamond Phillips makes a great Montezuma). But I think the AI will be reasonable, and hey, they may even suprise me. Also, I can replace dopey animated leaders with photographs according to Firaxis (which also means I can change leaders entirely). I guess Firaxis copied one thing from Activistion. But I don't like the leaders, so I won't eat crow there unless the art totally changes (fat chance). Won't eat crow on the AI either, again I'm sure it will be reasonable.
Where I will level my harshest criticism is at the following two items -
(1) No Scripting Language! Here is where Activision actually introduced an important innovation. Because Civ3 will not have such a language, Civ3 is really a step backwards with this lacuna. One, it allows modmakers improve on the game and create really cool scenarios. I had some great ideas about alien scenarios . . .
(2) No Social Engineering. This was a great innovation in SMAC. Instead we are stuck with a civ1 political model ten or so years later in civ3. Boring!
Will I eat crow? Nope. I'm sure I'll enjoy the game out of the box, but the fact is it could have been better and we all know it.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
quote:
Firaxis can do no evil. It's all good. |
Do you own stock? Are you an employee? If not, what do you care?
A software developer is only as good as their last few products. If Firaxis makes a good game, I'll buy it. If they crap in a box, stamp "Sid Meier's Sh!t" on the front, I won't (not even if a beefy roll of toilet paper is included). Firaxis is only a company, people.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
civcop
|
|
Someone mentioned chess and I believe that is a fantastic analogy here. The players I directed the term "sophisticated" toward are those who desire a game that challenges them every time they play it. They found ways to beat the AI in Civ 1 and 2, even on deity level, and so they were forced to turn to MP in order to be challenged. I could say that it's easy to fall into this rut if you continue to play the game in the same manner every time, to wit: I found a way to win on deity so I continued playing that same way every game and got bored. I also admit that human nature directs one to continue doing that which works and this same group may have been able to win even trying different methods of gameplay (i.e. warmonger, through science, etc.).
Then you have another group that found the game fun, even if they could win at deity most of the time too, and continued to appreciate the game. Thus comes the chess analogy. I've played a fair bit of chess and even got seriously into it for a time. I read books. I bought MCO (the "bible of chess"). I went to Kasparov's site daily to see what was new in the chess world and what he had to say about it. I studied notated games from chess Masters and Grandmasters. Despite all that, I still struggled against my chess computer when it was set at higher difficulty levels. But I still enjoyed the game. If you reach a point when you feel unchallenged, the game loses appeal. Such was the case for some with Civ 2. And so they view Civ 3 as likely to bring about the same problems for them. Others play chess because they enjoy it, not in order to become a Grandmaster. So it is with civvers. I suppose in the end I'm trying to say that if you are one of those who demands a game that will challenge you every time you play, for several years and several thousands of games played, you will be frustrated. Such a game would be difficult to create, expensive to create and produce and would require the most modern PC systems. Also, only a small segment of the gaming population would purchase it and it would be therefore unmarketable.
I hope for the sake of you guys (and dolls) who were easily frustrated with Civ 2 that you find Civ 3 to be a pleasant (no pun intended toward Mr.) surprise. But I do also wonder if anyone who spoke doom and gloom toward Civ 3 ahead of time (such as, "It will absolutely suck and I won't buy it!") will admit you were mistaken if in fact you are. I do respect the position of those who say that regardless of how good it is they won't buy it unless it has MP capabilities. They stand on principle.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Sabre2th
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by civcop
It appears that the more "sophisticated" players are at least suspicious of Civ 3 (if they haven't already written it off as crap) |
I consider myself to be a "sophisticated" player, but I still believe that civ3 will be the best civ ever. I see no reason why a person can't still enjoy a game even after they find a flaw. It's when they find flaws upon flaws that make the game actually unplayable, which I don't see Firaxis doing. They have worked hard (as far as I can tell) and I trust them to do their best in the time given to them.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sabre2th
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Locutus
How do you know it will be good, have you played it? |
How do you know it won't be good? Have you played it?
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Sabre2th
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Locutus
that this game will be everything they ever hoped for (something which unfortunately isn't the case for me |
Just because you didn't get everything you wanted doesn't mean you can't still enjoy it. If you don't like the game, great, but don't complain that you didn't get your civ3. Civ3 will be a damn good game (I think), but Firaxis can't please everyone.
|
|
| |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
04-10-2001 10:41
.
|