 |
| |
|
|
vondrack
|
 |
Praha, Czech Republic
Jan 2002
time: 06:23
|
|
In a dispute in another thread, a strange feeling has grown in me that what I had always been looking for in the game of Civilization, was rather rare, even though I used to think it would be the prevailing approach... I was quite surprised and I'd like to know if the feeling was right or not. Hence, I am posting this poll - it may be a bit biased regarding the options, since I am still sorta heating off...  So feel free to add your comments, please.
To clarify what I mean by the poll options:
I use whatever it takes to see the victory screen: I play the game as a purely statistical/mathematical model. There are certain game rules and whatever these allow me, I will do in order to be proclaimed the winner of the game (even if it means exploiting an imperfection in the rules or their implementation). MP might be my Civ-paradise. Note: Even though I do not mean cheating here, it would probably also fall mostly into this category.
I just avoid using exploits, but winning is what matters to me. If there is an imperfection in the rules or their implementation (IMO), I will avoid exploiting it, basically granting the AI players sort of "fair fight", but aside from that, I will do anything and everything to become the winner of the game. That is where the fun is for me, becoming the winner.
I focus more on enjoying a credible, immersive world. Even though I am a competitive player and I have goals to reach, I impose certain self-restrictions that help me enjoy my game in a world that sort of resembles some real world. Exploration of the unknown, making hated enemies, finding trusted allies, fighting over border disputes and resources, carrying retaliation strikes, keeping one's honor and pride, and developing my empire to be the best place to live in... a world I myself would happily live in... that is the way I like to play. If - playing this way - I finish up as the winner, it will just add greatly to my satisfaction, as I have apparently done a better job in building a great empire than my AI rivals.
I don't care about winning, I play Civ like SimCity. All I care for is nurturing my beloved empire. For me, I could have all the victory conditions turned off, 'cause it doesn't really matter if I win or lose. I just love to build smoothly working systems, kinda like Pharaoh, Zeus, Caesar, SimCity etc.
I am interested in bananas ONLY. What is this all about? 'f course it is bananas and potassium what matters, nothing else...
Note: as with most polls, I would appreciate if you just vote, maybe add your comment to the vote, but kindly refrain from responding to other poster's posts. The last thing I want is to have anyone's approach to the game belittled or questioned. Thank you. 
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Jethro83
|
|
Newcastle, Australia
Mar 2002
time: 15:23
|
|
Mostly #3, but a little bit of #2.
I like to make up a storyline of the world I am playing in (though most of the time I just keep it in my head and don't actually put it into writing). I find the stories of the great empires of the real world to be fascinating, and I like that I can create my own (even if it is only in a game).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
One_Brow
|
|
I voted #2, but I'm about 65% #2 and 35% #4.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
metalhead
|
|
I went for 2 leaning slightly towards 1, with tendancies toward 3. Winning is my ultimate goal, and often times, especially in the early game, it tends to be formulaic and shortsighted, although avoiding all exploits, including reloading. Towards the late game, I like to be tops in culture and happiness, thus tending toward 3. Overall, I derive more satisfaction out of winning than the empire I've created. When playing MP, I will probably tend more toward #1.
Out of curiosity, for those who chose #3 or #4, do you regularly play the game after someone has won? I personally do that only when I have won and have a bunch of nukes laying around, and I decide to toast the world before quitting. I would think regularly playing beyond endgame is a good indicator that you fall under #3 or #4.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Cidifer
|
|
Where's the option for "I just want to crush and destroy all that stand in my way" though that's not how i play I think it should be up there. I like having the strongest military then in the industrial age I like building a navy to move troops to other continents to protect civs that were good to me. Once I get ACC and airports I'm pretty much become the world police men and usually intervine in small conflicts between 2 or 3 civs. I then take out those that continue to invade others without reason.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MC Hawking
|
 |
Straight Outta Oxford
Aug 2001
time: 23:23
|
|
I'm in it for the bananas....
Other than the bananas I always kill the French and the Russians, If i acheive killing either of them I consider it a victory.
Last edited by MC Hawking on 02-11-2002 at 06:50
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Catt
|
 |
California - SF Bay Area
May 2002
time: 21:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by metalhead
Out of curiosity, for those who chose #3 or #4, do you regularly play the game after someone has won? I personally do that only when I have won and have a bunch of nukes laying around, and I decide to toast the world before quitting. I would think regularly playing beyond endgame is a good indicator that you fall under #3 or #4. |
I haven't played beyond the end since the first few weeks I had the game (January). Now I just end it when victory or defeat arrives.
Also, in the interest of clarifying my #3 "immersion" vote -- I definitely like to be immersed in a coherent, themed game, but that doesn't necessarily mean that I shoot for the happiest, most advanced, etc. civ. Sometimes, in a game with lots of early warfare and backstabbing, the perfect #3 game is a "Vlad the Destroyer razes all in his path and exacts revenge on the children of his enemies" sort of game -- just keeping to the theme, of course  . And I do always try to win, it's just not the end-all, be-all of the game.
Catt
|
|
| |
|
|
|
vondrack
|
|
Praha, Czech Republic
Jan 2002
time: 06:23
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Catt
Also, in the interest of clarifying my #3 "immersion" vote -- I definitely like to be immersed in a coherent, themed game, but that doesn't necessarily mean that I shoot for the happiest, most advanced, etc. civ. Sometimes, in a game with lots of early warfare and backstabbing, the perfect #3 game is a "Vlad the Destroyer razes all in his path and exacts revenge on the children of his enemies" sort of game -- just keeping to the theme, of course . And I do always try to win, it's just not the end-all, be-all of the game. |
This is a perfect example of what I was talking about when not directly relating any particular gameplay style to #1, #2, #3, or #4. If an AI civ backstabs me with absolutely no reason, I will go for a total war and destroy whatever it takes to have my revenge. And the immersion will still be there for me (there will even be more of it).
"...no matter how long it may take us to overcome this premeditated invasion, the American people will, in their righteous might, win through to absolute victory!" That's the kind of stuff I like to imagine... (hope I got the quote correct...  ).
I like your "themed game" expression, Catt. Finely describes what I had in my mind for #3.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
dworkin
|
|
Option 2 for me.
I want to win. I want to beat my last win score. I also want the biggest, best, happiest utopia on earth. But only because they win.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Akka
|
 |
In front of my computer.
Nov 2001
time: 06:23
|
|
Immersion, definitely.
What I like is to feel like I am writing the history. I like to imagine how the war that was fighted will appear in the history books several centuries later.
I like to imagine myself in a high-level council with my advisors, wondering if we should start a war against this neutral small nation that is asking for an arm and a leg for its oil, to enforce the security of our nation.
I like to imagine a big discussion of several of the inhabitants of my country, reading the newspaper about an invasion of an allied country, and then the declaration of my leader at the radio, saying that we won't let down our old ally and hence have given a ultimatum to nation X to immediately stop its agression or be considered at war.
I like to imagine the shocked faces of the rivals leaders when they hear through their secret network that "a new, terrible weapon, seemingly a very powerful bomb, was tested in a remote location of the X empire".
I sometimes stays in Monarchy, not because it gives me any advantage, but just because I want to imagine that my empire is commanded by a king/emperor, and that I hold absolute power and can start war or peace because an enemy leader was rude, or because they begged for peace.
I like to imagine the civilians of a city panicking and fleeing because my units are approaching their city.
I like to imagine the bonds of friendship or hate that slowly develop into two nations over the millenia.
I like to imagine the excited scientists observing how years of work finally allowed them to masterize fusion power.
I like to imagine the slow building of many improvement in cities, and people becoming more educated and cultivated over the generations.
I like to imagine the assimilation of foreign population into a rather universalist nation, or the harsh treatment and segregationism of a repulsive, oppressive tyranny.
I like to imagine all this when I play, to pretend that it's not plain AI-bot I face or befriend, but real people representing the real "spirit" of a real nation.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Pyrodrew
|
|
Interesting perspective on how to poll this.
quote:
Even though I am a competitive player and I have goals to reach, I impose certain self-restrictions that help me enjoy my game in a world that sort of resembles some real world. Exploration of the unknown, making hated enemies, finding trusted allies, fighting over border disputes and resources, carrying retaliation strikes, keeping one's honor and pride, and developing my empire to be the best place to live in... a world I myself would happily live in... that is the way I like to play. If - playing this way - I finish up as the winner, it will just add greatly to my satisfaction, as I have apparently done a better job in building a great empire than my AI rivals. |
Under that definition I would fall into #3. I put "self-restrictions" on many games I play too, that doesn't mean I want the AI to ignore the goals of winning (which was conveniently left out of this poll). Perhaps if it was not, many people would not have been so torn between #2 & #3. #3 is phrased great to appeal to all, especially with the phrase "If - playing this way - I finish up as the winner, it will add greatly to my satisfaction, as I have apparently done a better job in building a great empire than my AI rivals", which is phrased much better than #2's "simply winning". How can anyone say they felt they did [i]"a better job" than their competition if they were the only ones who knew how to win?
Last edited by Pyrodrew on 04-11-2002 at 08:03
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:23.
Apolyton Time is 00:23. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
31-10-2002 02:26
It's pretty obvious from the longer writeup and the tone of it.
|