 |
|
Bkeela
|
 |
Brisbane, Australia
Oct 1999 time: 15:12
|
|
Well, it seems that the game play is going to be great, but looking at the latest screen shots, I can't help but feel slightly, no, greatly disappointed.
To me, the screen shots looked no better than Test Of Time. Even Call To Power looked nicer. I admit that I expected a leap of graphical improvement like that from Civ I to Civ II. I mean, even Alpha Centauri looks better.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not really hung-up on this issue, and I'm not after map animations or anything, but I was hoping for something a bit more pretty. The units look great, so I truly hope they put A LOT more work into making the map a pleasure to behold.
Bkeela.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Bkeela
|
 |
Brisbane, Australia
Oct 1999 time: 15:12
|
|
It would be nice if the roads actually looked like roads, instead of big, thick brown lines that appeared to go over the top of forests etc. Surely it would be possible for roads to be slightly indented, and realistic looking, rather than artwork no better than Colonization.
Yes, the rivers need to be wider, and more distinct, and for the love of God, get rid of the current irrigation artwork. Civ I had better looking irrigation art.
I was hoping they would intergrate the 3d landscape of Alpha Centauri, but with more polish. But come on, the screen shots displayed maps no better than Test of Time or CTP. What's going on?
And basically the colours are just drab. It would be nice to have a vivid looking ocean that did have some kind of animation, instead of just a drab blue blanket.
Bkeela.
[This message has been edited by Bkeela (edited April 29, 2001).]
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Zylka
|
|
Links to these screenshots?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Adm.Naismith
|
 |
Milano - Italy
Oct 1999 time: 06:12
|
|
The more I look at the early screenshot, the more I scratch my head in doubt.
Ok, Yin26 live in the hope of "placeholders", and surely they are, to some extent, but...
How far can a graphic be stretched to cover the flat, flat, flat, very flat word of CIV III? My God, are we in the 2001 of games or what? 
I can play Chess on a flat chessboard, but surely can't see the point to play a game (as strategic as it is) on a flat isometric perspective.
I was hoping for enhancement to SMAC, that is more a draft than a final, but at least was a step into 3D looking.
Hell, I lost and forget a proper spherical globe map, I miss the smart exagonal map and survive to remember, but surely I'll have some hard time trying to living with a completely flat game (BTW MarkG and DanQ, don't you have an UBB code for a flat font? ).
The units seems more like lead model on top of paper board, and as I'd like all interesting game model enhancement (the Culture concept on top of all) I'd really see them fitted nicely into an effective graphic display.
Don't get me wrong, but I think all of you know the old difference about "map" and "territory". Now I think that Firaxis should decide if its Civ III main screen is a map or a territory, because the actual mix doesn't do well enough, IMO.
Map feature
Let me see essential info, cut every unnecessary element that can distract me from my game needs:
- flat as a chessboard (no isometric),
- clear square borders (grid) to help players counting movements, see ZOC and city influence extensions
- straight lines to show roads and rivers
- higly contrasted colors (unrealistic, if necessary, as in false colors photo, often used in astronomy) to help distinguish elements as bonus resources or units from the background
- isometric line to show terrain quote (if relevant for movement, fire advantage or else).
- "onion skin" layers to filter separate info, to avoid a cluttered map
Territory feature
- as 3D as possible to realistical reproduce a world view
- quickly rotable to 3 axis to gain the better point of view
- zoomable to the pratical extent needed to let the player have a "birds' eye look" to the whole, then going as near to the action to (micro)manage the required game details
- as graphically detailed as possible (at the chosed zoom level) to increment the "suspension of disbelieve"
Sid spoke about CIV III as the end of the old reviewers "great game, but the graphics..." closing, as common for Sid previus efforts.
I really hope that Sid has some great white rabbit into his graphic department hat, because as I think gameplay and strategic models are a must to the success, the sense of Civ II "deja vu" on the graphic side will certainly kill the game sales.
Civ 2.5 syndrome, you know.
------------------
Admiral Naismith AKA mcostant
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Lord_Davinator
|
|
Kathmandu
Nov 2000 time: 10:42
|
|
Almost everything about the map is kinda yukky... still I find it better than SMAC... which I really sucked, if you ask me. It resembles CTP a lot... and ctp wasn't that good in making you feel happy just by looking at your city. I think the swamps, rivers, roads, irrigation and possibly even the sea has to be made a bit more nicer. The mountains seem to be the only really gooooood thing about the maps.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:12. Apolyton Time is 00:12. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|