 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Roman
|
 |
Bratislava, Slovakia
Sep 2000 time: 05:12
|
|
Good column, Fiera, Firaxis and Sid have had more than their fair share of hero-worship, but perhaps it is a little too harsh.
The 7 civilization limit is truly worying (especially for scenario makers), but it is not yet certain as new previews seem to suggest, so I have some hope on this issue.
Graphics could also turn out to be annoying in Civ 3. I actively dislike stupid animations and turn them off wherever I can and I really don't need to see some overrendered units. From the screenshots so far it seems that the graphics aren't overdone, so I am satisfied - unless the animations cannot be turned off that is.
I don't know how unique civilizations will turn out to be, but they will definitely be editable - Firaxis stated that on their website already, so I am not worried. If they turn out to be good, so be it. Should they detract from the game, I will simply edit them to make them all the same. No problems there. In fact, the potential of being able (and not compelled) to assign different attributes to civs could be very useful for scenario-makers. 
For the most part, I think, Firaxis has listened more than I had hoped they would, so overall I am satisfied with what I see. Still, I applaud you for giving Firaxis some criticism - without both positive pull and negative pressure from fans they will not know what fans think is going in the right direction and what is way off track. 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Antonios
|
|
Larissa,Thessalia,Hellas
Oct 2000 time: 05:12
|
|
Yeah,MarkG you're right.I'm sorry to have spent so much time and dreams to this forum.Firaxis doesn't really listen to us.Or they listen what they want.Unfortunately.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
|
Yin26 is absolutely correct. I'm not intereted civ2.5 either. I remember alot of people complaining that CTP2 was merely a patch for CTP (hmm, a patch that screws up the AI - I though only microsoft did that . . .). That it was CTP1.5. So what's Firaxis's choice? Well, they could take the heat for putting out a mere patch to civ2 and charging full game price (and admit it - half of you would complain if civ3 felt like a mere patch - a mere TOT), or do something different a take the heat for daring to tamper with a classic. The only bad news I've heard so far is the 7 civ limit (and then only if its hardcoded - which it probably is) and the lack of public works (and many people are happy about that, its a matter of perspective). I suggest that anyone who is concerned about civ specific stuff read the thread I started regarding my solution. And as for Firaxis not listening enough, well its their game so don't sweat it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Zealot
|
 |
Lisboa, Portugal
Jun 2000 time: 05:12
|
|
It's sad to see that there is a possibility to only have 7 civs. I thought that after the poll here at Apolyton, the idea was something like 32 civs. That would be the number, IMO, that could please, or satisfy, both fans and developers. Seems not... 
BUT I WANT PORTUGAL IN A REAL CIVILIZATION GAME!!!! 
Portugal wasn't on Colonization (wich I consider a big flaw, not having heard about a country called Brazil), not in Civ2, just in CTP... 
I'm feeling a little abandoned, as an Apolytoner... 
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
|
Let's see, if they Firaxis would have picked 8, 16, 32, 64 civs there was no way for them to win. Each group (players) wanted their no. of civs no matter what.
Unique units or standard units again no way to win. Each group (players) wanted the units their way only.
Engineers vs. P.W. again each group wanted their way. No way for Firaxis to win.
I could go on and on but it is very clear there is no way to win because each group of players want the game as they feed it should be.
Remember this game is an upgrade of Civ 2, as Civ 2 was an upgrade of Civ 1.
Look at AOK it was an upgrade of AOE. If Civ 3 change to much it will no longer be a Civ game. If it is not change enough it will Civ 2.1. Firaxis had a tough time ahead of it, making this game work for most of us players.
------------------
|
|
|  |
 |
|
lord of the mark
|
 |
FUKCOV - Former United Kingdom Colony of Virginia
Dec 2000 time: 00:12
|
|
I assume that lots of aspects of the game are still up for grabs, and that Firaxis IS listening. That is why i've been pounding so hard on the unique civs issue. In case they havent thought everything through, being so busy making a (holds breath) terrific game.
My impression is that theyve found a really good balance between making this civ3 rather than civ2.5 on the one hand, and losing the essence of "civ-ness" on the other. Many of the changes like limiting ICS, and adding a more elaborate culture model will make Civ3 MORE "civish" than civ2 was, IMHO. I am on the whole pleased. Which is why i find the whole unique civs thing so annoying. If they were really screwing up the game it wouldnt matter so much, but they're not. I doubt its possible to eliminate the idea at this point, since they have mentioned it in public, and i dont think its just units you get as result of what you do, cause i think they could have explained that already. My hopes are raised by the fact that they dont seem to have mentioned it much lately, so I'm hoping it wont dominate gameplay a la AOE.
LOTM
|
|
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|