 |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
Locutus
|
|
ACS CTP1/2 Manager & Civ4 Co-Manager
|
 |
Hengelo, The Netherlands
Nov 1999
time: 06:26
|
|
I think they're pretty much evenly matched. RoN really only misses India and maybe Babylon, but at least they got Africa right (which had a much richer history than most people realize, and I still maintain that the Zulu are NOT a civ). I think 3 pre-Columbian American civs more than compensate for the lack of Sioux/Iroquois, though I agree some North American civ would have been nice.
Other than that I don't think the comparison with PTW is entirely fair, we should compare it with vanilla Civ3. IMHO we can only compare with PTW after the first X-pack for RoN comes out. With <30 civs, more is under almost any circumstance better (and with unique civs ike Civ3 and RoN, any game with X-pack bound to have more civs than any game without one).
If you look at it that way (comparing it to vanilla Civ3), I think substituting the Indians, Babylonians and Persians for the Spanish, Mongols and Maya is not a very bad decision. I'm sure India and Babylon will be in a future RoN X-pack too (after which we can make a comparison which does both games full justice  )...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
tniem
|
|
Hope College
Apr 2000
time: 00:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by WarpStorm
Then it's a shame that RoN is being designed by some of the same people. |
I'm pretty sure that the RoN teamed left Firaxis well before most of the Civ 3 stuff was complete. I would find it hard to believe that the RoN team had much of an impact on Civ III.
As for the civs, would like to see the Arabs and Indians in the game. They are more important in terms of civilization (early) than anything out of Europe. Yes the Germans, French, and English are all important in the last three hundred years but before then they were wastelands compared to the Indian and Arab civilizations.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
monkspider
|
 |
banned
Aug 2001
time: 23:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Locutus
but at least they got Africa right (which had a much richer history than most people realize, and I still maintain that the Zulu are NOT a civ). |
Loc, you're on the right track here. I too feel that Firaxis has botched Africa horribly, but I feel that RoN has done the same, albeit to a lesser exent.
Nubia could arguably be grouped with Egypt, and even if not they are not a very noteworthy civ compared to say, Mali, Ethiopia, Ghana, Songhai, and so forth. Bantu is sort of mystifying in that I have always considered it more of a language than a civilization. It is good that BHG has tried to give Africa decent representation, but it is a shame that they have done so in such a poor manner.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Peter Triggs
|
|
Gone Fishin, Canada
Jan 2000
time: 05:26
|
|
Warpstorm,
Along these lines, here's a gem from one of Rohag's newsletters last week:
quote:
Impress GameWatch Japan has an interview with Brian Reynolds! Shou, a dedicated fan of Rise of Nations associated with the Stack-Style site, directs our attention to an interesting comment Brian Reynolds makes about RoN's graphic engine:
" ... We did not create it [RoN's graphic engine] from scratch. The graphic engine of RoN is based on the engine of 'Alpha Centauri', and we started working on creating a new 3D engine from SMAC's 2D one just before from we began development of 'Civilization III' ... "
Shou therefore suspects an early version of RoN was one of the prototypes of Civ3.
Impress GameWatch Interview with Brian Reynolds:
http://www.watch.impress.co.jp/game...030212/ron2.htm
|
Or vice-versa.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Locutus
|
|
ACS CTP1/2 Manager & Civ4 Co-Manager
|
|
Hengelo, The Netherlands
Nov 1999
time: 06:26
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by monkspider
Nubia could arguably be grouped with Egypt, and even if not they are not a very noteworthy civ compared to say, Mali, Ethiopia, Ghana, Songhai, and so forth. Bantu is sort of mystifying in that I have always considered it more of a language than a civilization. It is good that BHG has tried to give Africa decent representation, but it is a shame that they have done so in such a poor manner. |
I couldn't agree more. In fact, I made those same points myself in this very forum a few months ago. However, I don't know ANY game which represents Africa better than RoN is doing, so you don't hear me complaining (too much  )...
Anyway, Mali, Ghana and Songhai (as well as to a lesser extend Kanem-Bornu) are more logical to group together than Egypt and Nubia. I would prefer to use Zimbabwe, Benin or Swahili(/Kilwa) instead of several Sahelian Empires. But I certainly don't think Nubia is less noteworthy than any other African civ. It's probably the oldest civ in Africa (older than Egypt) and it continued to exist and prosper long after Egypt was incorporated in the Roman Empire (the last of the Nubian kingdoms still existed in the late 15th century, possibly even later). But I do agree that for variety's sake, Mali/Songhai or Ethiopia would be preferable above Nubia.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Civ 3 was supposed to come (originally) with MP out of the box; but we had to wait for the XP. After release they (Firaxis) were unclear whether or not it was to be a downloadable option or an add-on for $$!
It looks like RON won't pull the same stunt. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
tniem
|
|
Hope College
Apr 2000
time: 00:26
|
|
As I recall, it was in their FAQ before the game shipped. Something along these lines:
Will there be MP in Civ III?
Yes. We are going to have LAN, hotseat, and something else that we have been working on. Unfortunately we are not ready to talk about MP at this time.
While not explicitly its in, it was definitely implied. I will try to run some searches on the archives to see if anything comes up where we discussed this directly.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26.
Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
top of page
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
|
|
|
17-02-2003 00:50
Attachment: 
|