 |
| |
|
|
Baloo
|
 |
of the dingy garage
Nov 2000
time: 05:16
|
|
My thinking is since Brian's SMAC has taken the world by storm because of its innovative features, I believe if Brian's still with Firaxis Civ III would be in a better shape. If Brian hadn't left, we might see:
1) a Post-Modern Age in Civilization III that will extend the game to 3000 AD. It better be not as cheezy as in CTP2, but the inclusion of a PM Age is a testament that the designers will always strive for innovations over the last game and not readily be content with past game achievements.
2) Better, varied Diplomatic transactions such as:
a) the option to shoo away a Civ from attacking your friend (like in SMAC)
b) trade units.
c) middle-fingered your opponents so he'll get mad at you (good in Democratic gov't).
d) planning an coalition/allied attacks.
e) More specific Bilateral and Multilateral agreements: Free Trade, Border sovereignty pact (changing the borderline of a sovereign nation caused by an establishment of a new city will not be allowed anymore), Joint Science Venture Pact, UN specific resolutions, etc.
3) A reasonable Firepower concept compromise by making advanced units very expensive to build relative to older units, but still maintain consistent superiority (but not 100% invincibility) toward obsoletes.
4) More real-world government types such as adding Fascism and Fundamentalism to the fray. For the Post-Modern Age, Few Neo Government types (Ecologist, Pro-Business, Pro-Welfare) which prototypes the ones in SMAC will be certainly be welcomed. Hey, SMAC is a Firaxis game. Firaxians should not be afraid to draw connections between the games.
Finally.......
5) More complex and "manageable" Civilization game. It should not scare away first time gamers but it'll hide the expanse inside, waiting for players to familiarize with the game until the needs come, like the way Windows XP presents itself to its users.
Not the Fisher-Price Civilization III where everything feel sterile, warmy and most important of all, impotent to tweaks and expert users' micromanagement.
Ok the fact of the matter is Brian R. is really not needed for Civ III to live to its fullest potential. But I want to see innovations not just more of the same except of the culture concept & better AI. C'mon your local public library as culture messenger? Cathedral and Temple as means to spread cultures?
In the real world Globalizing a culture is all about TV programmes, movies, arts, tech gadgets, consumer products and McDonalds. It's like the designer had thought about the culture idea as a new feature, but had to reuse the same stuff (Library, Temple, Cathedral) from past Civ games & can't think of new approaches in delivering the new idea.
I hope to see not just another Good Civilization game in CIV 4, but a Civilization game par excellence.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
squid
|
|
Your comments about cathedrals and the like display great ignorance in yourself. The church was, bar none, the greatest power in transfiguring Europe in the Middle Ages.
If you would rather conquer the world by spreading the dried out stale hamburgers from McDonalds, I pity you.
Though there have been some diplomacy changes, I think the trade table is a vast improvement. Though "quit attacking my friend" is no longer there, this has been replaced by the "mutual protection pact".
Also, you can no longer ask an AI to attack another for you without also declaring war on that country. This is a better reflection of the real world. England could not ask the US to attack, say, Spain, without England entering into the fray. It's not going to happen.
Furthermore, your comments regarding "Few Neo Government types (Ecologist, Pro-Business, Pro-Welfare)" make me pity you on an even higher level.
If you were spoiling for a fight, you should have chosen your points more wisely.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
tishco
|
 |
of rambling for the uk
Aug 2001
time: 05:16
|
|
maybe culture should have been religion, more like moo3 was going to be like, with you choosing one and getting allies and enemies from this, like shogun only not so forced, and istead of culturally taking over cities the one who arent your religion start getting people who believe in yours because of the religions value, not yours. then research opens up new religion, and, if yours is losing 'cos others are no making it strong you change, like government,only, like shogun again, this increases the chance of unhappiness and revolt to enemies.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Venger
|
|
Keeper of the Can-O'Whoopass
Jan 1970
time: 23:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Baloo
My thinking is since Brian's SMAC has taken the world by storm because of its innovative features, I believe if Brian's still with Firaxis Civ III would be in a better shape. |
It couldn't have hurt...right now Civ3 is more like CTP than Civ2.
quote:
1) a Post-Modern Age in Civilization III that will extend the game to 3000 AD. |
I'd settle for just 5 to 10 techs and units past what we have now - they should take a long time to develop as well. In Civ2 I added Siege Mechs, Terminators, Rocket Artillery, and such with advances like A.I., Siege Warfare, Ballistic Targeting, Advanced Metallurgy, etc... just enough to spice up the end game.
quote:
2) Better, varied Diplomatic transactions such as:
a) the option to shoo away a Civ from attacking your friend (like in SMAC) |
If this means ask one Civ to act on your behalf with another, it's ABOUT DAMN TIME. You give the Russians 100 gold to act on your behalf to end your war with India, or trade, or whatever...
It's OBSCENE this was left out.
quote:
c) middle-fingered your opponents so he'll get mad at you (good in Democratic gov't). |
I'm still in my first game (REAL long, played it for like 5 days now), and have yet to go to Democracy. But I've been a Republic since the very early stages, and have just decided to go kick ass rather than worry about hving war declared on me. Nice not to have Senate interference...
quote:
3) A reasonable Firepower concept compromise by making advanced units very expensive to build relative to older units, but still maintain consistent superiority (but not 100% invincibility) toward obsoletes. |
Yep - why is Civ2 a better combat model than Civ3?
The rest makes some okay sense too. I also am starting to dislike the interface - looks like CTP except CTP had more informational area. And information bar similar to Civ2 is VITAL for a game like this...
Venger
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Baloo
|
|
of the dingy garage
Nov 2000
time: 05:16
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by squid
Your comments about cathedrals and the like display great ignorance in yourself. The church was, bar none, the greatest power in transfiguring Europe in the Middle Ages.
If you would rather conquer the world by spreading the dried out stale hamburgers from McDonalds, I pity you.
|
So you haven't been on a transcontinental flight lately, going to Asia or S.America? 
You see, people outside America identify American Culture with Mickey D, Coke, and MTV. You might think them as gross. French or Iraqis might think they're grosser than gross.  But it's a fact that years ago that Frenchs unleashed their anger toward American globalization power by smashing a Parisian McDonald restaurant, ain't it?
Don't ask me how one Civilization can project its power upon the rest of the world just by spreading Culture. The Firaxian designers are the ones who thought that Culture is a powerful stuff that can conquer all. There's not one example in Modern History where a city willingly joins a rival nation because it has better Library access or shinier University. The people might get affected by the culture (lower productivity, less loyalty perhaps) but not the City or the Empire itself. This is my core objection of the use of culture in this game: it's not thoroughly fleshed out and it doesn't work the way Culture works in the real world.
On the other hand, Cathedral - whose Culture is that? Western's? Christianity's? Europe's? French's? Well one thing for sure no one race or civilization can monopolize religion or even project a religion of its own. A religion such as Christianity is a power by itself, not a power projected by a civilization. Very often Religion readily takes a unique, localized form upon reaching a land because it has to adapt to the local culture.
However, it has no bearing what so ever in a Civilization type of game where the focus is on Nations in history.
quote:
Furthermore, your comments regarding "Few Neo Government types (Ecologist, Pro-Business, Pro-Welfare)" make me pity you on an even higher level. |
What's your objection, kindly explain? Maybe I wasn't that elaborate explaining them. They may not example of a working realistic government types, but SMAC uses them to a great effect. I just want variety and a bit more creativity, that's all.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16.
Apolyton Time is 00:16. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
11-11-2001 17:44
|
|