 |
| |
|
|
Azeem
|
|
Although it's quite early to be talking about another expansion or the 4th installment of the "Civilization" series, I think it would be interesting to talk about what we'd like to see in a future "Civilization" game to pass the time. 
What new aspects do you think should be included?
Here is what I'd like to see:
1. Import/Export: Trade is vital to any civilization. We should be able to import or export both goods and food for luxuries, sustenance, and cash.
2. Civilization-specific Wonders: It's kind of wierd to see a Chinese "Forbidden Palace" in an Aztec city. Why not have a "Forbidden Palace" for the Aztecs have Aztec architecture? Ever wonder what a Chinese colossus would look like? The Chinese could have Emperor Qin's pyramid tomb at Xi An as their version of the "Great Pyramid" and the Babylonians could have "Babel Tower" (since it is somewhat like a stepped pyramid). Each civilization should have their own style of architecture for wonders.
3. More different wonders: There are A LOT of wonders in the game from Europe, but not a lot from Far East Asia, the Middle East, Mesoamerica, or South Asia. Here are other wonders Firaxis should consider: Brobadur Buddhist Temple (one of the most elaborate Buddhist Temples in the world) of Indonesia, Stonehenge of Britain, the pyramid of Chichen Itza, the Pyramid of the Sun at Teotihuacan, the "Porcelain Tower" of China, or the Taj Mahal of Agra.
4. More specific architectural styles and more Civs: The Indians shouldn't have Far East architecture, but their own unique architecture. How about having other civilizations (you can never have too many civs) - the Khmer and the Indonesians and have them and the Indians form a group? We could have Far East, Mediterannean, Mid East, American (all of which are already in Civ3), and "South Asian" (for Indian, Khmer, and Indonesian) as the classifications for civs.
5. DOMESTIC POLICIES!: It doesn't really feel like you're running a country or empire until you have domestic policies. You should be able to set minimum wages or tax rates upon citizens and that could affect their mood. The presence of a large military in a city could also alter citizen mood depending on government. Citizens riot over domestic policies, not necessarily because there aren't any collosseums in their city.  You should also be able to pass laws that can both make or break you such as an act to strictly limit freedom, which would prevent riots for a time, but would cause resentment.
6. Disasters: Disasters affected every civilization. They could make the game much more challenging and make a game more interesting, though they shouldn't be too frustrating.
Do you have anything else to add?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Coracle
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azeem
Although it's quite early to be talking about another expansion or the 4th installment of the "Civilization" series. . . |
Wrong. A YEAR ago people were posting inquiring about a Civ 4 (not made by Firaxis) as they were disappointed with Civ 3. That was early in 2002. There has been considerable speculation since.
So it is not too early at all. I can't wait for Civ 4 as I;ve gone back to playing scenarios of Civ 2.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
The Moose
|
|
Besides more civs (inca, sioux/apache, thai....), i'd like to be able to get a leader by peaceful means. there have been threads about that before. e.g. first circumnavigation of the world and others...
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
TheEmerged
|
|
More control over world map creation -- for example, an option to pick the frequency of special resources.
More scaling support for Huge Maps, or at the very least enough options at the start of the game to help mitigate some of the game aspects that get out of hand.
REAL support for a "create your own culture" option in non-scenario play -- at the least, allow me to pick my own advantages!
I'm still working my way around PTW right now (I finally broke down and bought it), so I can't comment on too much. Those three still stick out like sore thumbs though.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Azeem
|
|
quote:
That is already done inderectly, because if you increase the tax slider you can't afford to set the luxury slider as high. I'm not sure a strong association is necessary. |
The tax slider isn't much for "Domestic Policies". Strangely, people don't complain about high taxes, nor are they happy about low taxes, which absolutely makes no sense whatsoever. I think it would be more interesting when you can have more effect on your citizens through laws you pass. I would like it if it feels like I'm running a country, not a board game .
BTW, the Import/Export thing ought to affect commerce. Like you can have your cities creating a certain product with resources nearby (such as silk clothing made from silk or jewelry made from gold or gems) and selling them to other civs. Actual trade between civilizations should be a HUGE part of civilization, but in Civ3, that's not the case. I think it was a little better when they had trade caravans back in Civ2.
Last edited by Azeem on 07-01-2003 at 11:43
|
|
| |
|
|
|
TacticalGrace
|
 |
Invisible, Silent, Deadly.
Jan 2001
time: 05:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azeem
4. More specific architectural styles and more Civs: The Indians shouldn't have Far East architecture, but their own unique architecture. How about having other civilizations (you can never have too many civs) - the Khmer and the Indonesians and have them and the Indians form a group? We could have Far East, Mediterannean, Mid East, American (all of which are already in Civ3), and "South Asian" (for Indian, Khmer, and Indonesian) as the classifications for civs.
|
Which style should the Americans have then. Presumably they wouldn't have the American style you are suggesting...
quote:
5. DOMESTIC POLICIES!: It doesn't really feel like you're running a country or empire until you have domestic policies. You should be able to set minimum wages or tax rates upon citizens and that could affect their mood. The presence of a large military in a city could also alter citizen mood depending on government. Citizens riot over domestic policies, not necessarily because there aren't any collosseums in their city. You should also be able to pass laws that can both make or break you such as an act to strictly limit freedom, which would prevent riots for a time, but would cause resentment.
|
This is partly abstracted as the government types which could perhaps do with some overhauling. The rest is done perfectly well in the tax rate/science/luxury rates.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
woody
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Sir Ralph
The question should rather be, why Infogrames used Firaxis. Infogrames holds the right on the Civ series now. They could as well have ordered the programming work from another company, but they decided to go with the name Sid Meier. In the unlikely event, that CivIV will ever happen, it may be that Infogrames chooses a cheaper and less user friendly company than Firaxis, who cared a lot to patch and improve their work. Our only hope is, that Infogrames goes bankrupt. What is, btw, more likely to happen than CivIV, given their present problems. |
Don't kid yourself into believing that Firaxis patched Civ out of the goodness of their heart. They only did so because IG funded them to do it. IG may suck, but don't attribute everything good to Firaxis and everything bad to IG. They're both to blame for the mistakes of Civ3 and PtW.
And yeah, IG is headed for bankrupcy. Their book value is negative and they're also losing money. They can't keep that up for long before their creditors come knocking at the door.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Azeem
|
|
TacticalGrace, there already is "American" architecture for Civ3. It's used for the Americans, the Iroquois, and the Aztecs.
When I speak about "Domestic Policies", I mean that I would like to impose laws upon my citizens. Perhaps we should be able to customize our governments directly through the game (not just through the editor)? For example, you could have a constitutional monarchy (such as the UK) or a religious republic (such as Iran).
|
|
| |
|
|
|
TacticalGrace
|
|
Invisible, Silent, Deadly.
Jan 2001
time: 05:24
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Azeem
TacticalGrace, there already is "American" architecture for Civ3. It's used for the Americans, the Iroquois, and the Aztecs. |
I thought America had Greeco-roman arcitecture like it did in civ2...
quote:
When I speak about "Domestic Policies", I mean that I would like to impose laws upon my citizens. Perhaps we should be able to customize our governments directly through the game (not just through the editor)? For example, you could have a constitutional monarchy (such as the UK) or a religious republic (such as Iran). |
I agree. The civ system of government is too one dimensional. having two components which could be mixed and matched sounds like a good idea.
(religious, feudal, consitutional, libertarian, conservative, communist).(despotism, monarchy, republic, democracy)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
woody
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by TacticalGrace
depends how much the creditors have put in. If you give someone $1000 credit then paying it back is the debtor's problem. If you give someone $10,000,000 then it's your problem... |
Well, according to the financials, they've only got about $12 million in cash left, and they'll burn through that in a year. After that, do you think anyone will loan them any more money? 2003 is the last year for Infogrames!
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:24.
Apolyton Time is 00:24. |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
06-01-2003 00:56
!
)
|