Can find info here on the CFC main page. :)

http://www.civfanatics.com

These shots were cropped screenies scanned in from the PC Gamer magazine, so they aren't the greatest quality. Also, it's over a year out from release so there's going to be a LOT of work yet to be done on the graphics. A year's worth of change will likely mean the game will end up looking nothing like these shots.

In any case, there's some interesting info to be gleaned from the shots. :)

[Screenshots removed at PC Gamer's request. Please go buy the magazine to see the screenshots.]

:)

Woa. Looks weird.

is it just me, or does this look CR@P? oh deer me ... why do developers think that we are so shallow as to need pretty graphics to want to play a game? (oh, and by the way, this ain't pretty)

My $0.02 of ranting! (possibly in Euros, as it might be worth more ;)

Multi-unit unit graphics! :D

is it just me, or does this look CR@P? oh deer me ... why do developers think that we are so shallow as to need pretty graphics to want to play a game? (oh, and by the way, this ain't pretty)

My $0.02 of ranting! (possibly in Euros, as it might be worth more ;)

This thing is still a long ways to go before being up to retail level. This is very early work.

ok, fair enough ... and I guess I don't mind the, um, water ... that looks ok ... hope they do something about the roads tho ...

Whoa! Trippy! I'm not as yet as to what I am looking at (poor quality of the image plays a big part in that). Although from what I can tell, it looks like Civ 1 style tiles, that is to say they are not isometric (twisted by 45 degrees, then raised 45 degrees). The tiles are clearly square if that is the case (sorry to those which wanted hexagons), and they are quite large (Cologne is in the middle of a 3 x 3 territory). I'm not sure how different terrain types work, because the terrain does not match the tiles in a perfect square fashion; just look at those mountains (which I'm guessing are the grey bits).

Edit: OMG! It looks like a board game!

For anyone who thinks the graphics look bad, compare some of the early shots of Civ 3 with the current game: ;)

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/civilization3/screens.html?page=30

http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/civilization3/screens.html?page=28

These shots if Civ 3 were released only in May of 2001, and Civ 3 was released only 5 months later in October. Civ IV is at least a year away.

Man, CivIV! :D
Great, can't imagine playing a brand new Civ. :)

Yeah, the screenies do look weird (too blended), but I'm not worried.

So, anyone want to lay any new bets as to when they think the game will be released?

I'm not overly impressed with the graphics (though, as has been said, its early days yet) but some of the actual game info sounds....intriguing (and exciting ;)) especially the zoom in function AND the multiple research paths (though I DEFINITELY want to hear more about this latter feature!)
Still can't discern anything significant about the combat model, though I hope the unit experience thing doesn't overly benefit the warmongers!!!

Anyway, does anyone else have any thoughts on the gameplay issues raised in the article?

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

Assuming the release date is November 2005, Firaxis still has lots of time to polish the graphics, so I wouldn't worry too much about it yet. :) At this stage lots of stuff are placeholders.

I am impressed that Firaxis made the game (including MP) playable so early.

PS: I have the full scan of the article, but can't post it yet. The folks at PC GAMER wouldn't be too happy if I do. ;)

Assuming the release date is November 2005, Firaxis still has lots of time to polish the graphics, so I wouldn't worry too much about it yet. :) At this stage lots of stuff are placeholders.

I am impressed that Firaxis made the game (including MP) playable so early.

PS: I have the full scan of the article, but can't post it yet. The folks at PC GAMER wouldn't be too happy if I do. ;)

Ahhh, to be in TF's shoes...I can only dream of all the insider stuff. Now I have to spend $10 on that magazine. Last magazine, though, saved me 60 bucks from buying WoW, because it looked too complicated.

Hmmm, I also know that these are only early graphics, but can anyone hazard a guess as to what the coloured squares, and the grey bar, underneath Cologne might signify?

Also, do you think these are genuine 'multi-unit' graphics, or could they be a joining together of multiple unit types?

I'd be interested in hearing peoples theories-no matter how Wild and Conspitorial they might sound ;) :D!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

Whats WoW Rbiss?

The graphics look interesting.

@Aussie - Maybe Gologne's grey boxes indicate unit production somehow?

It really does look a lot like Heroes IV at the moment. And that's not a good thing. But we'll see what happens.
As for the actual game info, there's not too much new stuff, but it definitely sounds cool.

Whats WoW Rbiss?

World of Warcraft. It's a MMORPG, and I was going to get it, but I read a starter guide in PCG and it was just crazy how extensive and in depth it was. Not for me.

the screenshots look ok. i prefer the civ3 graphics. the city display thingy is better in civ3

Whoa! That looks weird. I definately hope the graphics are changed before the game comes out. :undecide:

I guess I'll have to repeat this message every few posts for people who only look at the shots and then post...

Civ 4 is at least a year away, the graphics will change GREATLY between now and release.

It looks wierd now, but it looks nice, actually. If there is a grid that can be turned on, I can get used to it quite easily.

Umm.... at least there will be something for people at the C&C forum to do...

Edit: But there are no Giant Death Robots!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

here's the thing, regardless of how the graphics look, the bottom line is that the direction they're taking the graphics is artsy, and away from what it is now, so while i'm not ready to come out and say the graphics for civ4 are horrible or will be horrible, i'll sya this. the direction the graphics are going is bad

Damn, these come out right after I post my other skeptical topic... now this is gonna make me look pessemistic as hell... OMG... those are ermmm ummmm ugly as hell... I mean, even the early screenshots of Civ 3 had finely detailed units... those warriors just look like little blurry hulk hogans... Those graphics dont need to improve, they need to damn change totally!!!

I just realized that if those are the screenshots, then it would be impossible to see all of your empire in one screen! :eek:

Keep in mind the images are scanned from a magazine and blown up... they're not in-game screenshots, so the quality of the images is MUCH poorer than the actual game would be. They were also most certainly cropped (you can't see anything else on the screen, and there's no way that'd be the whole interface).

The quality of the scan isn't the best it could be, MaXXXXXuM. :rolleyes: I wouldn't be to sinical at the moment, It'ld be smarter to wait until some actual screenshots are placed on the web before commenting on the art. As for the direction of the graphics, I swear they are trying to make it look like a boardgame, probably to point out in some way that they got rid of a lot of micromanagement.

Here's another thought... those units might actually be a lot of different units placed into a stack (each stack seems to only have three or four different figures in it, so maybe stacked movement has been implemented in a away similar to how armies function. Then again, I could be completely wrong).

is it just me, or does this look CR@P? oh deer me ... why do developers think that we are so shallow as to need pretty graphics to want to play a game? (oh, and by the way, this ain't pretty)

My $0.02 of ranting! (possibly in Euros, as it might be worth more ;)

One problem is you are assuming good graphics mean cut backs in other areas (and then, immediately after you assume this, you state that the graphics aren't so great). So I don't think there will be much of a problem (aside from the graphics not being great :p ).

Personally, I don't mind it. Yeah, it takes some getting used to, but it isn't bad.

I'm amazed so many people think the game will actually look like this... :rolleyes:

Better add a disclaimer to the first post...

i realise graphics is the first thing everyone sees, and it's natural to judge a book by its cover, but i rarely STOP playing a game because of its graphics. more important are things like AI quality, gameplay, fun factor, etc.

some great looking games just suck to play (eg sim city 4000) and some great to play games look cornball (eg wizardry 8)

no matter what they do with the graphics, i hope they implement all the improvements bullet-pointed in thunderfall's post, AND improve the interfaces (woulda hoped for hexagons, too).

quite frankly, the graphics are going to be the easiest thing to mod anyway, so why worry about that part? i'll only be shelling out the $80 (australian) if i hear that gameplay rocks.

EW

i like the graphics even though others don't. some cleaning up would fix the job. but like Trip said this is just early screenshots and the graphics are guarrenteed to change. i'll even bet someone in this thread $10 the graphics will change. anyone up.

Very true. Graphics are only the outer packaging for the real meat of the game.

Personally, I'm far more interested in some of things that are SHOWN in the shots than their actual quality. Plus the article has some very nice info... I guess there won't be any people who doubt that Civ IV will include MP from release any more. ;)

Gah! I want hexagons! Gimmie gimmie gimmie!

I don't know though, Trip, those screenshots didn't really tell me ANYTHING (except perhaps that I should buy that issue of PC Gamer ;)!) As far as graphics go, though, I would be happy if they went in the direction of a 3D version of Snoopy's graphics ;)! I'm not obssessed with the graphics, but some decent Eye candy is still nice :)!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

Here's something on game (And software) development - You always make it look pretty, last. You could have the best graphics in the world, but it could be very buggy. When you make a game, you use placeholder graphics. Those are just so you have something to look at, and get some idea what you're walking into. If it was just a black background, you wouldn't know if you can't move because you're next to the water, or whatnot.

i.e., say you made a game where water, and mountains were impassible (i.e., a RPG). You need simple graphics so you know where you are on the map. Those are just the placeholders, since the vital bugs and features are what's important.

Take my project I'm just finishing up at work as another example. It's a web application-based project, and currently, it looks ugly because of all the colors and debug labels. That's ok, since I'm in the process of removing the colors and making everything look nice.

One more example for those who don't get it. ;)

Watch a design show (like While You Were Out). What do they do first? First comes analyzing the room, and the design. Then comes constructing pieces of the room (couch, pillows, furniture). THEN comes the staining and painting of the furniture.

Stop teasing them, Trip. :p

I just replaced the 2 screenshots with the ones cropped directly from the scan I received, without any resizing.

[links removed]

I don't know though, Trip, those screenshots didn't really tell me ANYTHING (except perhaps that I should buy that issue of PC Gamer ;)!) As far as graphics go, though, I would be happy if they went in the direction of a 3D version of Snoopy's graphics ;)! I'm not obssessed with the graphics, but some decent Eye candy is still nice :)!
Well, there are definite differences between Civ III and what's shown in those shots... windmills? What are those things next to the city's name? Plenty of interesting things, I think. :)

Also notice the buddha icon by one of the cities. Religion in the game, perhaps? ;)

Trio of workers - Worker groups, maybe?

And you also have things there that look like tents, AoE's farmland...

And the Civ1 layout looks nostalgic. ;)

I'm amazed so many people think the game will actually look like this... :rolleyes:

Better add a disclaimer to the first post...

Comparing the quality of the early Civ3 screenshots to the final result, yeah, the final version looks better, but they look similar.

It appears that tey aren't going for a completely realistic look. I don't mind that. I don't mind that, it just takes a bit to get used to it.

Now let's look at what it shows:

The map appears to have switched to the civ1 type tiles (squares as opposed to diamonds). Rivers appear to go between tiles, just like before.

There are 3 warrior groups and a Spearman. Cologne is size 2, and is is building a warrior. There are horses north of the city and what appears to be jungle to the west. Forest in plains is to the south. I can't tell if that's a guy holding a shield or just a shield icon in the bottom right of the picture.

The city has two bars. They could be for culture, production, or food. There are some icons to the right, which don't seem to make much sense to me, but probably make sense to someone. ;)

The second pic looks zoomed out, but the caption implies it is zoomed in. :confused:

:wow: :wow: :wow:
It's so... beautiful.

Sid, you've done it again!
:worship: :worship: :worship:

It's a 3D engine. It's probably going to have some of the same features as Warcraft III, Pirates!, etc.

Also notice the buddha icon by one of the cities. Religion in the game, perhaps?

I'm glad the larger pics were shown, because I couldn't tell what that was in the first pic (I thought it was a sack of gold).

Comparing the quality of the early Civ3 screenshots to the final result, yeah, the final version looks better, but they look similar.
They have a similar structure, yes, but you can tell that pretty much everything was tossed and "rebuilt." The point I was trying to make is that the look and feel of the graphics can change drastically even in a short amount of time.

The second pic looks zoomed out, but the caption implies it is zoomed in. :confused:
Yeah, looks like they got the captions mixed up on the shots. ;)

Gah! I want hexagons! Gimmie gimmie gimmie!

Squares are better than hexagons.

Hexagons only allow you to move in 6 directions.

Squares allow you to move in 8 directions.

They have a similar structure, yes, but you can tell that pretty much everything was tossed and "rebuilt." The point I was trying to make is that the look and feel of the graphics can change drastically even in a short amount of time.


Yeah, looks like they got the captions mixed up on the shots. ;)

Atleast you can get up close and personal with your game now. ;)

I think the people here have spent too much time with Civ from a normal distance. ;)

so, why do we need 3D then?

ah well, I must admit, I really don't care ... as long as the game has lots of depth, cool features, awesome gameplay etc etc I won't care if they make it look like someone had too much booze and went to the corner ...

Thanks for the screenies, always good to know there is something to wait for ... this does pose an interesting new question. Do we stop posting here and start making a "what we want in Civ 5" thred? ;)

so, why do we need 3D then?
It's easier to develop and more flexible to work with.

Just a couple uneducated guesses as to what we can see from the screenshots. Notice how two of the warrior units have 4 figures, and one has 3? And the spear unit has 3? I wonder if instead of showing hit points in a seperate bar, the number of figures in the unit IS the hit point indicator. (Whether it's 2-3-4-5 hp's based on experience like Civ3, or just proportional, I don't know).
Edit: Nevermind, after closer examination of the bigger pictures, it appears that they do have some kind of HP bar or health indicator above the units, and that the unit figures all have 4 figures (assuming one of the warriors in the unit on the right is cut off). It would be much harder to allow modders to create units if they had to develop graphics for an unknown number of figures per unit, anyway. IT would have been nice, though... :rolleyes:

As for the city bars, my guess is the top is food growth, as the food bin fills up, that yellow bar fills across the screen, when it's complete, the city grows. The dark yellow square might be an indicator of how much surplus (i.e., how far the bar moves per turn). The bottom would be shields, showing progress toward the construction of the current project.

As for those concerned about being able to see 'the whole empire', one of the bullets is that the 3D engine will scale from a full-world view all the way into city view. I'd say these are both fairly zoomed in compared to the world view. ;)

Why 3-d for zoom?

Well I know I run into problems where I want to see more of the map, but the zoom doesnt go out far enough. With this, that won't occur.

Squares are better than hexagons.

Hexagons only allow you to move in 6 directions.

Squares allow you to move in 8 directions.

Not true, if you have 8-directional squares, four of the directions are 'cheating'. IE, if you need to go diagonally in a civ game (say... north-east), you've be an idiot to actually go directly diagonally, because if you just go north, THEN go east, you've uncovered about twice as much land, but you've used the SAME number of movement points. In an 8-direction square game, oddly enough, the shortest distance between two points is not a straight line. :crazyeye: This issue surfaces because the tiles allow you to travel off them by using their corners, and not just their flat sides.

Hexagons do not have this issue, and hence are much more... logical.

Just a couple uneducated guesses as to what we can see from the screenshots. Notice how two of the warrior units have 4 figures, and one has 3? And the spear unit has 3? I wonder if instead of showing hit points in a seperate bar, the number of figures in the unit IS the hit point indicator. (Whether it's 2-3-4-5 hp's based on experience like Civ3, or just proportional, I don't know).
Actually, there's 4 Spearmen, not 3... the fourth is kind of camoflaged, I had trouble seeing it at first also. ;)

As for the city bars, my guess is the top is food growth, as the food bin fills up, that yellow bar fills across the screen, when it's complete, the city grows. The dark yellow square might be an indicator of how much surplus (i.e., how far the bar moves per turn). The bottom would be shields, showing progress toward the construction of the current project.
Seems reasonable.

As for those concerned about being able to see 'the whole empire', one of the bullets is that the 3D engine will scale from a full-world view all the way into city view. I'd say these are both fairly zoomed in compared to the world view. ;)
Yup, exactly.

Why 3-d for zoom?
3D makes zooming much smoother. If you'll notice, when you zoom out in Civ 3 it looks kind of pixellated and distored. That's because you're basically blowing up or shrinking the pixels that already exist. With 3D, all of the graphics are created AFTER the game determines how large everything is supposed to be.

Actually, there's 4 Spearmen, not 3... the fourth is kind of camoflaged, I had trouble seeing it at first also. ;)


Yep, noticed it "upon further review", and I edited my post. Too bad, it seemed like a cool way to represent unit strength.

It looks pretty but... looks kinda crowded and complicated.. i hope they improve on the graphics even more so gamplay and camera angles are much more pleasant to see.. the way the screenshot showing units in 4 just makes the game too crowded.. i cant figure out what and where..

Yep, noticed it "upon further review", and I edited my post. Too bad, it seemed like a cool way to represent unit strength.
Doesn't look to me like anything is cut off to the right...

It looks pretty but... looks kinda crowded and complicated.. i hope they improve on the graphics even more so gamplay and camera angles are much more pleasant to see.. the way the screenshot showing units in 4 just makes the game too crowded.. i cant figure out what and where..
Part of the problem is that the shots are very blown up (after TF zoomed in on them to give people a better view). It's probably easier to see in the game itself.

One of the advantages of a 3D engine is that it will be very easy to make the game isometric. Looking at the early civ 3 shots it looks like the tiles were a straight down angle instead fo isometric. Also the visual style of the game is very much subject to change was well. As it has been stated many times, the current graphics are probably placeholders, nothing more than a step above stick figures probably used in the first builds. Don't read into the eye candy department. SMAC had drastic visual changes just months before the game was releaced. Heck I think they even delayed the game to make the game look better.

Doesn't look to me like anything is cut off to the right...

The warrior unit on the right, above the spearmen, shows only 3 figures, at least in the shot in post 2 of this thread. The flag bearer, and two behind him. However, I could see that the 4th might have been cut off by the edge of the picture, as the whole tile isn't shown.

:groucho:
so we get the so called "third dimension" in civ...
:lol:

oh well, I don't mind as long as the game is still civish in the end
(its still roundbased, right?;))

The warrior unit on the right, above the spearmen, shows only 3 figures, at least in the shot in post 2 of this thread. The flag bearer, and two behind him. However, I could see that the 4th might have been cut off by the edge of the picture, as the whole tile isn't shown.
I saw that unit, but I don't know, I think if it were cut off we'd be able to see the extreme left edge of the fourth Warrior... either way, hard to tell.

:groucho:
(its still roundbased, right?;))
Soren has said in the past that Civ 4 will definitely be tile-based and turn-based, so you don't have to worry about that. :)

From the looks of the first screenshot, the yellow bar is food(bright yellow being current food, the dimmer bar being how much to be added in the next turn), and the blue/gray bar shields(same shading indication). Assuming the warrior's 10 shields, it's got 5 done already and adding 2 per turn. This seems simple enough.

Well, though there is a LOT that I would dearly like to see in CivIV, I will be happy enough if they have the following:

1) An AI which can fool me into thinking I'm playing a human!

2) The ability to make cities more SPECIALISED than is currently the case.

3) A greater emphasis on trade, diplomacy, espionage and general cooperation!

4) An end of the 'warrior going to the ends of the earth' (i.e. more mystery to the map, for a greater proportion of the game!)

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

Well, though there is a LOT that I would dearly like to see in CivIV, I will be happy enough if they have the following:

1) An AI which can fool me into thinking I'm playing a human!



If you want this then they need to use database AI. That is an AI that uses information stored in a database to make 'decisions' from. The AI would store and read turn information from a database and based on what has happened in previous games it would make statistical and probability predictions on what do to, on what may happen 5 turns from now based on a move, on what may happen 10 turns etc, and then make it's move. Then store the gathered data in the database.

This way the AI will 'learn' from each move you and the other AI make and no game will be the same as it may 'pick' a different path each time based on the prediction equations used.

And if you don't believe this works play SuperPower or SuperPower2. They use database AI and I have never played 2 games that are the same.



As for the pictures, looks... interesting. I hope that less micromangemnet is a myth!

Hey, I HAVE Superpower-and that is what I am basing my hopes on :)! Didn't know there was a Superpower2 though!! Whats it like, as good or better than the original?

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

I heard a pretty good argument recently for the grid squares to become hexagons instead. Those dont look like hexagons to me :sad:

Im also kinda hoping for a sniper/sharpshooter unit; as well as more diverse air units (zepplins, perhaps)

Another thing I REALLY want for civ4 is much greater importance for explorers and scouts!!!!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

No visible national borders? Ugh, so Civ2-esque, even if the graphics are much better.

Simms-remember, these are placeholder graphics-NOT the final product!!!!! I feel confident that the Graphics for civ4 will be, at the very least, as good as those in Civ3! I will reserve my judgement on the graphics, though, until around September-when we should start to see the previews for the actual game!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

No visible national borders? Ugh, so Civ2-esque, even if the graphics are much better.
What are you talking about?

You can see the borders in the first screenshot. If you're talking about the second shot, it appears to have "cleared map" mode on, as all the information on cities and units isn't on the screen. The first shot appears to have more info on everything.

No more spearmen defeating tanks.

finally!!!!

i'm not thrilled about the graphics but something about them says "rough work in progress".

i'm not a fan of 3D but perhaps civ 4 can make me think twice about this.

i cetainly look forward to more screenshots of a more finalized product before i give it a thumbs up or down. i'll probably insist on playing it first before giving my opinion on it.

i didnt like the bars over the city though, i like numbers, things i can look at with a glance and know EXACTLY where my progress is. but maybe that'll change.

and why do i need to see a buddha over the city? if its not needed, then leave it off the city overview. KISS, keep it simple stupid.

The buddha would be there to say that that city is Buddhist. Apparently they are including religion in this game.

I'm excited as hell. I'm glad they made the switch to 3d, it just makes zooming and stuff so much nicer. Here's hoping they won't be sacrificing gameplay (a la Age of Empires->Age of mythology)

The graphics look great considering they are at least a year away from completion.

the multifigure units are interesting... If I were to implement it from a development scale, (rather than a modding perspective) I would make MFU's look like a real bunch of warriors rather than 4 independent units, but lets see what develops. maybe they are keeping it easy for modders.

I am dissapointed with the rivers! I want to see rivers used for trade and transport. They aren't just obstacles you know Sid!

I can't say I'm terribly impressed with the units in general. I know that its a year from release, but it does indicate the 'direction' that the units will take. I would rather have them look more realistic, ie: only twice as big as the town they are attacking rather than 5 times as big...

BUT...I am impressed with the look of the geography so far...ie: the windmill and trees and farms. Lets get snoopy involved in the colour scheme tho.

Since Christmas is Upon Us, and I'm thinking of Civ4...

Here is my Civ4 Wish-List

1. Improved AI - The database-type earlier sounds good, although slightly scary. =-)

2. True diplomacy - I want to have friends as well as enemies, without using the lock alliance

3. CIVIL WARS! Each civ should have 2-3 break-away civs which could result either after long periods of civil unrest away from your capital, or whenever a culturally isolated area wants autonomy - ie: England = America, Canada. This would mean that we won't see america duking it out with egypt in 2000 b.c. (unless you like that kind of thing...)

4. Flavour Units - Take a hint from our game designers here...

5. Increasing levels of automation - I'll admit, I use the governor after I get more than 30 cities or so...

6. A tech tree reminiscent of DyP or RoR. I don't want to research them all! But the system they have discussed so far also sounds interesting.

7. Call me a romantic, but I like the aerial view. It is nice to get a good look at your capital once in a while.

8. Support for up to 32-64 slots in multiplayer. We won't actually play with 64 players, but I wouldn't mind having lots of opponents in a 2 player hotseat game. Let us decide how much our comps can handle...

9. Packaged scenarios, with monthly releases of user-submitted scenarios. Conquests was great (for its time). The scens here are better. How about an official website that actually gets updated?

10. Increased emphasis on trade. Lets see more resources with more than luxory status. For example, flint gives civs luxory points, plus they boost your archers attack, etc. Plain old lux. resources don't add much to gameplay (unless wish #1 and #2 are granted.)

11. This might sound a little crazy....but how about a combat system where strategy is involved? (Well, there is SOME strategy to combat now, but). I wouldn't being able to control the battlefield a little bit, at least for big battles. maybe even a little Real-Time ( i know, i know, it will ruin a classic. but even if it was an optional thing... I am just not really happy with the a/d system at this level. i can roll dice on my own.)- I know it of goes against traditional civ combat, but come on - wouldn't you like to be the first army to properly use horse archers, schiltrons, flanking, etc...

and finally...

12. Rivers and Lakes that work! What the hell? Why can't my canoe travel up the river? Wouldn't this make seafaring a much better advantage?

Any other ideas? Have we (civfanatics) submitted a list to sid yet? If not, lets get crackin...the only way to make it better is to say something

i stil havent decided whether or not i like the look of it bt nothing is gona stop me from buying it

I am dissapointed with the rivers! I want to see rivers used for trade and transport. They aren't just obstacles you know Sid!

It seems to me that the roads connect to the river in the second shot. I don't see what it could mean, but might indicate that rivers pay some role in trade and transport.


I can't say I'm terribly impressed with the units in general. I know that its a year from release, but it does indicate the 'direction' that the units will take.
I don't think that the units are taking any direction at all, at least not yet. The warriors in the screenshoot looks just like the Civ3 ones, and same for the other units as well. The only diference is that there are more than one unit shown on each tile. But the number of units shown doesn't seem to be completely fixed. (the workers in the second screenshot are only three). My guess is that all/most unit graphics are just placeholders.

Not true, if you have 8-directional squares, four of the directions are 'cheating'. IE, if you need to go diagonally in a civ game (say... north-east), you've be an idiot to actually go directly diagonally, because if you just go north, THEN go east, you've uncovered about twice as much land, but you've used the SAME number of movement points. In an 8-direction square game, oddly enough, the shortest distance between two points is not a straight line. :crazyeye: This issue surfaces because the tiles allow you to travel off them by using their corners, and not just their flat sides.

Hexagons do not have this issue, and hence are much more... logical.


Indeed, plus hexagons allow us to have a globular world (if you add some pentagons as well).

Is that a windmill I see?

Development is being headed by creator Sid Meier himself.
Cool!

Civ IV has been written entirely from scratch.
Great!

The 3D engine will allow you to zoom smoothly from a global view all the way down to a single city.
Cute... Although it can become quite silly: the fact that Civ3's world is flat will only show more clear.

Individual units will gain experience and acquire new upgrades such as bonuses against specific enemy types and the ability to use enemy roads.
Can't tell how that will work out.

No more spearmen defeating tanks.
That will ease a lot of minds... ;)

Besides incorporating new technologies, the tech tree has been changed to allow radically different research paths to the same high-level technologies. Now you won’t have to follow a strict research path to be competitive later in the game – a design that opens up a whole new world of possibilities.
Best news I've heard so far! :goodjob:

Civilization IV has been designed to fully support the mod community. The game is written using flexible XML data files and the Python scripting language so that modders will have no trouble at all creating their own personalized worlds, units, technologies, and historical events. Advanced modders will even be able to control the AI.
I hope there will still be possibilities for amateur mods, like me. I've seen it happen so often in games that the more complicated the program becomes, the more complicated it becomes to make your own levels. Best example is Doom and it's successors.

Civ4 has been designed from the outset to include the multiplayer mode. You will be able to team up in co-op mode against the AI or other teams of players, and a random-map generator ensures an equal start.
Multiplayer from start: inevident. :lol: It was almost a shame Civ3 didn't have it at the beginning. But I guess that was Infogrames' fault, and they're not involved anymore. http://www.straland.com/images/smilies/cool.gif
Equal start: good.

About the screenshots: the only thing I say is that it's good you can see the squares again.

@ mongoloid cow i think the grey bit is road.
So, one unit would consist out of four member or more?
I wonder if they can perform different tasks within a turn (f.i. attack and pillage)
The grey bar, under the city, would that be the production advancement?? (would be a little step back IMO).
The zooming in and out sounds wildly fantastic and... no more spearman killing tanks YAY.

Too bad, it seemed like a cool way to represent unit strength.

My feelings exactly - like in Master of Magic *sighs nostalgically*

They say, that Civ4 will be easily moddable. Does anyone have any ideas of the file format of the units?

Individual units will gain experience and acquire new upgrades such as bonuses against specific enemy types and the ability to use enemy roads.

Sounds great! Almost role-playing! :D

No more spearmen defeating tanks.

:worship: :worship: :worship:

Besides incorporating new technologies, the tech tree has been changed to allow radically different research paths to the same high-level technologies. Now you won’t have to follow a strict research path to be competitive later in the game – a design that opens up a whole new world of possibilities.

Wonderful! :goodjob:

Civilization IV has been designed to fully support the mod community. The game is written using flexible XML data files and the Python scripting language so that modders will have no trouble at all creating their own personalized worlds, units, technologies, and historical events. Advanced modders will even be able to control the AI.

Get's better and better! :goodjob: :goodjob: :goodjob:

I agree the graphics loók cruddy, but since they're probably only placeholders I'll reserve judgement... and I don't really want 3D, but I guess it was inevitable - and I'll get used to it...

My only problem: it's so loooooooong to wait! :cry:

I hope the terrain will be slightly animated.

Anybody notice how the spearman are standing in a circle instead of facing the same direction?

About the warriors, the two units on the left both have 3 men in front and one behind, so the one on the left has to be different somehow, since it doesn't have 3 men in front but only one.

Anybody notice how the spearman are standing in a circle instead of facing the same direction?

Yes - I wondered whether that's a defensive formation.

Edit: Taking another look at the second screenshot, you can see all the units in the cities are in a circle facing outwards - so yes, it looks like a defensive formation (status fortified, I'd guess).

No visible national borders? Ugh, so Civ2-esque, even if the graphics are much better.

They're there. You can see the green city border (barely) on the green grass.

Development is being headed by creator Sid Meier himself.
Civilization IV has been designed to fully support the mod community. The game is written using flexible XML data files and the Python scripting language so that modders will have no trouble at all creating their own personalized worlds, units, technologies, and historical events. Advanced modders will even be able to control the AI.
I hope there will still be possibilities for amateur mods, like me. I've seen it happen so often in games that the more complicated the program becomes, the more complicated it becomes to make your own levels. Best example is Doom and it's successors.

That is, of course, one of my concerns. One argument is, "There'll be resources on the Net!". However, for someone who likes to make minor changes, they don't want to go out and buy a several hundred (or thousand!) dollar piece of software to say, make the grass look less flourescent or something, or make the borders standout more so that they can see it. Not everyone has access to the Internet.

The graphics look pretty good, even for placeholders; they look a bit less realistic than Civ3's, but that'll probably change, so they're fine by me. If they have a grid, that'd be great...in the beginning, I'll need it. The Buddha looks pretty interesting as well.

@Sims: Like CT said, there is one. Look to the left to see green contrast against the yellow of desert/plains..

where I can see that Buddha and on which picture?

What would the windmill represent? A terrain improvement that adds production (like mines in Civ 1-2-3)? I would like it if there is a change in look of the production increasing terrain improvement in ancient times and modern times. It would also be nice if the production increasing terrain improvement had a different graphic in mountains than in grasland (mines in mountains, windmills in grassland).

Not that the above is very important to me, the fact that the game will be very moddable is the best thing to me. The flexible techtree also sounds very good.

where I can see that Buddha and on which picture?
In the first picture to the left of the city name Cologne.

I didn't get it at first either, I thought it was a sack of gold... :crazyeye:

Cologne as a buddhist settlement :)

3D makes zooming much smoother. If you'll notice, when you zoom out in Civ 3 it looks kind of pixellated and distored. That's because you're basically blowing up or shrinking the pixels that already exist. With 3D, all of the graphics are created AFTER the game determines how large everything is supposed to be.
Um? That sounds like vector vs bitmap rather than 3D vs 2D to me; am I missing something?

They say, that Civ4 will be easily moddable. Does anyone have any ideas of the file format of the units?

from the article:

Civilization IV has been designed to fully support the mod community. The game is written using flexible XML data files and the Python scripting language so that modders will have no trouble at all creating their own personalized worlds, units, technologies, and historical events. Advanced modders will even be able to control the AI.


So, XML for all kind of data (something like bic file written in plain text format) and Python scripts for events/actions. As for graphics, I don't know.

this does pose an interesting new question. Do we stop posting here and start making a "what we want in Civ 5" thred? ;)

It's not a new question. I started that thread a few months ago when I realized just how far Civ4 was along.

Um? That sounds like vector vs bitmap rather than 3D vs 2D to me; am I missing something?

3D == vector; 2D == bitmap

As for graphics, I don't know.

In the Gambryo work I've done in the past we imported models and animations from 3DS files. I assume that Firaxis will have a somewhat similar setup.

Assuming the release date is November 2005, Firaxis still has lots of time to polish the graphics, so I wouldn't worry too much about it yet. :) At this stage lots of stuff are placeholders.

I am impressed that Firaxis made the game (including MP) playable so early.

PS: I have the full scan of the article, but can't post it yet. The folks at PC GAMER wouldn't be too happy if I do. ;)

When is this issue of PC Gamer supposed to be at the news stands? Does anyone know?

Um? That sounds like vector vs bitmap rather than 3D vs 2D to me; am I missing something?
As Warpstorm said, that's what 2D and 3D is. I tried to make my answer more abstract so that people who aren't programming/graphics experts could understand...

Cologne as a buddhist settlement :)
Fits perfectly.
That's not a Buddha. It's Rainer Calmund, sitting next to Cologne.

What do these huts next to the cities mean? Will a city finally be able to grow beyond one tile???

Aargh.. I hate 2D games gone 3D.. Most of the time the end result looks like you-know-what and you think back to the good old days.. Remember Leisure Suit Larry and Monkey Island? Didn't they look a lot better when they were drawn as comics instead of those inflated 3D-balloons they became in the latest editions of their games?

Too bad to see Civilization go down that road as well.. (By the way: Is it too obvious that I don't like 3D? I mean, games like Half-Life 2? Sure! 3D is great.. Games like Civilization: nooo! :eek: )

Picture 1:

- Forests on mountains -- it appears that we'll have different terrain types now. Look 2 NE of Cologne for what I'm talking about.
- That tile 1 NE of Cologne is interesting. Grassland? Mountains? Hills? Mixed terrain? I don't know what to make of it, but the blend of terrains is interesting. I wonder if there are LOTS of blended terrains as mountains give way to grasslands or plains to hills or.... Would be interesting. Doesnt look likely, though, as it's not universal.
- As people have said, back to squares instead of diamonds -- at least at this point. That can change, though, pretty late in development, I believe, with minimal problems. At least, I'm not completely convinced Civ IV won't be back to the twisted squares of Civ II and III. No hexagons, though, as that would need to be done immediately. Too bad. :(
- The units have TWO bars of something above them (those little tiny green bars. A/D values? HPs current and total possible? HPs and morale? The bottom one is always longer, for whatever that's worth.
- The flags of the units also look different. The three warrior units have their flags nearly full out. But the flag over the spear unit is quite droopy. Since the top bar is also white and significantly shorter, I'm wondering if MAYBE the two are related. My current GUESS is that the two green bars are current hps over max hps (greatly varying max hps by unit, too, appears to the case) and the flag is an easily visible representation of the ratio. Morale might be tied to flag, but since there's been no text mention of morale, I'd tend to doubt it.
- Is that some kind of bonus resource NEE of Cologne on the mountains? Very unclear whatever it is.
- Horses are back, so I expect the whole strategic resource thing to be back, too, in some form. Makes me happy.
- That red arrow over Cologne is so high it makes me think it's placed wrong. Oh well. Graphics stuff will change mightily.
- Cologne is size 2, building a warrior. I have to agree with the brighter yellow being food in storage and the dimmer food to be added. Brighter grey is shields built (5 of 10, I'm supposing) and dimmer is shields to be added (2 of 10, I believe, too). The three trade arrows sign to the leftmost confuses me. Three commerce from the city? My best guess. Cologne is apparently a worshipper of Buddha. The star presumably means capital? Would make sense to me, anyway.
That's quite a lot of info available, actually, on the main screen. I hope/expect actually going into the city would provide more detail. Apparently, though, the food/shields/commerce trifecta will remain and food will still determine growth, shields building one item at a time, etc. (best guess anyway). It's really a pretty good system, so I'm not disappointed (though I'm sure some will be).
- I gotta agree the spearmen look to be fortified and the warriors not fortified.
- Borders (cultural or claimed territory or some-such) still definitely exist.

Picture 2:
- I believe we’re looking at three towns. No names, though. :( Pretty zoomed in for no names. Makes me wonder about zoom levels some.
- Windmill? ??? ??? Not sure what to make of that.
- Those huts also confuse me. Not sure what to make of them. Mini-towns? Squares being worked? Terrain improvement?
- I gotta think that big ugly yellow thing is a wheat square – on grassland.
- The tile SS of Northern City is obviously irrigated. Clearly delineated tile on where the irrigation ends, too. But what the heck is that aproned shape of blue and green mean? No clue here. And why the one farm-looking building – just part of the irrigation change?
- Two east of the irrigated square (NW of the Eastern City) is something odd. Looks like a semi with its back open or something. Trade? Shipping something somewhere? Anomaly? ??? It’s on the road, though, which makes me wonder a bit.
- Another odd person-looking thing WW of Eastern City (SW of the semi) on the square with the huts. <Shrug>
- The roads mostly appear to go somewhere – to the coast, to another city, to the river, to a hut. Two exceptions. One road heads north off the visible screen. I’m guessing that connects to something. Second is the weird loop in the road west of the semi = north of the odd-person-looking thing = SE of the irrigation. I’m gonna call that one a graphics blip for now, but it’s odd. And why two roads to/from the river in the same square, joining for a while and then splitting? Makes no sense to me, but again I guess merely a graphical thing, not a gameplay issue.

That’s about it, from me. Pretty interesting stuff. I may well have to get the magazine, but I expect enough discussions of it here to minimize the need.

Arathorn

@Arathorn: Good analysis, you motivated me to go take a closer look! I know we're all guessing at this point, but here's a couple responses that I see. The 'semi'-looking thing, I took to be the graphic for a mine. Looks to me like an opening with tracks or something going into it, not too far from the current mined plains graphic. On the irrigation tile, that looks like a person (Farmer, maybe?). My first thought was that it could show which tiles are being worked, but I don't see workers from the other towns, so that doesn't seem right. But that might also be the icon near the camp to the SE.

I also wonder about the 3 arrows in the Cologne picture, but the arrangement (not linear) makes me think they do not represent 3 trade, I would expect them in a row or other easily scaleable representation. It could mean that it generates positive trade, or is connected to the trade network, maybe?

Wow, exciting, can't wait to play it.

I am content just to sit back and let Firaxis develop the game. I think they know what they are doing. Undoubtedly there will be improvements. The biggest thing I am hoping for is a much improved diplomacy aspect. Someone previously mentioned mutual cooperation, that would be great.

About the units, Trip and the others are right, it is too early to make judgements. I believe that Sid knows what Civ fans like and I am sure he and his team will deliver!
I may prove my ignorance with this, but was Sid directly in charge of Civ 3? The original post on the home page certainly implies he is directly in charge of this one, which is great.

Well i dont love the grapics. Comparing to some civ 3 graphic mods this is nothing. Just this zooming is cool but the grapics must realy be improved, the units too i think.

Arathorn, amazingly detailed observation :goodjob:
I'll comment a bit.

Picture 1:
- Forests on mountains -- it appears that we'll have different terrain types now. Look 2 NE of Cologne for what I'm talking about.

It might be also forest on tundra, although not likely.


- The units have TWO bars of something above them (those little tiny green bars. A/D values? HPs current and total possible? HPs and morale? The bottom one is always longer, for whatever that's worth.

Shorter line can be movement indicator, too. White = fortified?


- Is that some kind of bonus resource NEE of Cologne on the mountains? Very unclear whatever it is.

I think so. Furs, perhaps?

Picture 2:
- I believe we’re looking at three towns. No names, though. :( Pretty zoomed in for no names. Makes me wonder about zoom levels some.

Or maybe city names display was just switched off.


- Two east of the irrigated square (NW of the Eastern City) is something odd. Looks like a semi with its back open or something. Trade? Shipping something somewhere? Anomaly? ??? It’s on the road, though, which makes me wonder a bit.

I'm pretty sure it's a mine.

Well, it sounds like unit modding and versatility will be enormously improved upon. I wonder how these units will be upgraded? Will they lose the ability to use enemy roads and such when they turn in their pikes and pick up muskets and rifles?

Pic 2 - Maybe to show which tiles are being worked, they are planning to show not just people (like the farmer) but symbols, like huts and windmills? It may look silly to move these symbols around if they look so permanent, though.

Looks very nice indeed. And think of the possibilities. New stuffses, beta test opportunities, ...

3D == vector; 2D == bitmap

Well, that's a little simplified, but the right general idea.

[gory technical detail]
A 2D image is typically rendered by taking fixed bitmaps and performing operations on them. There is an inherent problem in the rendering operation, in that certain operations like rotation for example can cause major distortions in the final image due to different pixellation. There are techniques like smoothing and anti-aliasing to handle this problem, but you'll usually see 90 degree rotations and a limited number of fixed images in a 2D system.

3D is rendered by taking a point of view, light source, and mathematical model of the image, and creating the screen view on the fly, frame by frame when there is movement. This has the advantage of allowing nearly infinite zoom, rotation, and scroll, as long as the resulting image has enough pixels to be visible at all. Additionally, you can manipulate the mathematical image to make the characters move -- animation becomes a sequence of modifying the image instead of showing a sequence of images. They'll still probably animate by using a sequence of discrete steps instead of continuous motion, but when you animate a warrior walking north, you can use the exact same animation sequence for walking him south -- the image is drawn "looking from the other side".

The disadvantages are that typical 3-D images on less than studio-quality systems can lack definition due to limitations in the hardware, or performance problems. Good 3D will only look good and perform well on systems with at least decent 3D graphics cards.

[/gory technical detail]

Now a look at the extreme positive potential of 3D. Right now, a battle is shown from the top with an isometric twist -- but in 3D you can seamlessly shift to a battle closeup and show it from any direction! You can shift the perspective point lower and see the ground like a commander would see it. Terrain can be much more realistic this way. The potential advantages go on and on -- now we just have to hope Firaxis delivers on the potential.

Looks a bit like GameBoy graphics to me.....but I'm keeping the faith, they are bad screenshots and the game is some way off. If it makes them same kind of leap Civ3 did from Civ2 I'll be happy.

As Warpstorm said, that's what 2D and 3D is. I tried to make my answer more abstract so that people who aren't programming/graphics experts could understand...
Obviously you failed, since this iggerant didn't understand. :p

I used to play with 2D vector gfx in programs like Arts & Letters and Corel Draw as a kid. There's no reason beyond usefulness they should be in any specific number of dimensions.

(I suppose an animated gif could be considered a 3D bitmap ...)

I think is better improve CivIII than launch another Civ.

Hmm, I just hope they wont have the horrrible idea to make civ4 real time instead of turn based.

But its so great to finally have constructive news!

The only bad feeling I got about the scrreen shots is that they give the impression of a real time game, instead of turn based. Which would be the worst idea ever.

besides its great to finally have constructive news!!

Soren has already said a while back Civ 4 will be turn-based.

for all the terrain improvements in picture 2 I see NO WORKERS...:hmm:

That unit in the middle appears similar to the old Civ 3 Workers... they have the little white head-things (what do you call those anyways? :p).

Someone on the main page under the topic said that the graphics look like the Pirates! graphics... Yes, they kind of do, but the general positioning is obviously different.
I was thinking that Firaxis would use the Morrowind engine for CivIV as well.


Now that this information piece is released, there should be a little bit more flow in the comming weeks, me thinks.

Weird, these shots give me a real retro 90's kinda feeling. Not sure if that's good or bad yet. :)

Oh and ehm.. didn't they say Civ 3 would debut with MP as well?

Civrules, you really need to start spelling Morrowind properly. :)

Please no multi-units!!! They look so crowdy without adding anything new.

Civrules, you really need to start spelling Morrowind properly. :)

You're right. ;)

This is the first time I've seen you post here... :)

I was thinking that Firaxis would use the Morrowind engine for CivIV as well.

Now why would Firaxis use the engine from Bethesda Softworks? Yes, it uses a customized version of Gamebryo also, but you pretty much have to make lots of changes to it for your needs.

One thing to remember is that if this is from a print article, the graphics were from about 4 months or so ago. They might not really reflect today's version (or they may).

Well, that's a little simplified, but the right general idea.


Of course it's simplified. I didn't want to go into the gory technical details :)

Thanks for explaining it well.

Please no multi-units!!! They look so crowdy without adding anything new.I agree. I hate multi-units.

Now that this information piece is released, there should be a little bit more flow in the comming weeks, me thinks.

Further info I found on the net stated that there was more info to be expected after the new year! :)

Am I the only one who finds this part the best of games? The preview part, everything new, ok i have no life :p

Well, as long as we're reading things into these screenshots, I had a thought:
If the 'fortified' spearmen are facing in all directions, and the 'nonfortified' warriors are all facing the same direction, does that open up the possibility of units facing a specific direction for the purposes of, say, defense or line of sight? If so, that could result in some interesting applications for things like flank maneuvers or ambushes.
And yeah, I realize that that's a lot to conclude from one screenshot. :)

Possibly the flags mean nothing, but it is possible that they relate to experience. Certainly, the three arrows have something to do with trade; perhaps they mean that the city is linked to a trade network?

And I will reiterate that these graphics look suspiciously like the Pirates graphics.

I really liked how civ3 looked when I first got it... then I switched to Snoopy... then to Rhye... basically it really does not matter what they ship with; someone here will do something better, and then we will all use that.

I do not know about the rest of you, but the part I really siezed on was this: HISTORICAL EVENTS

Bringing that back is worth shoddy graphics and creepy 3D-ness. EU2 anyone? ;p

it suuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuucks

I really liked how civ3 looked when I first got it... then I switched to Snoopy... then to Rhye... basically it really does not matter what they ship with; someone here will do something better, and then we will all use that.


I'm sure this will happen and fairly quickly after release.

Weird, these shots give me a real retro 90's kinda feeling. Not sure if that's good or bad yet. :)

Oh and ehm.. didn't they say Civ 3 would debut with MP as well?
The difference now is that they've had it working for almost a year (maybe more), whereas with Civ 3 that certainly wasn't the case. I couldn't even play MP with PTW.

I am a bit dissapointed, not with the graphics which will change, but with the fact that multi-units are used :(
I really can't stand them, they clutter and make the game look worse. Graphics don't make a game, but it is sometimes hard to enjoy oneself when units you don't like are on the screen..

November 2005. Waaaaaaaa:cry: Thats to long to wait. Oh well, I'll just have to play Civ 3 until then(not that thats a bad thing).

I am a bit dissapointed, not with the graphics which will change, but with the fact that multi-units are used :(
I really can't stand them, they clutter and make the game look worse. Graphics don't make a game, but it is sometimes hard to enjoy oneself when units you don't like are on the screen..

It is feedback that will change that.

If more and more people don't like that, Firaxis will probably make it an option.

These words....
Besides incorporating new technologies, the tech tree has been changed to allow radically different research paths to the same high-level technologies. Now you won’t have to follow a strict research path to be competitive later in the game – a design that opens up a whole new world of possibilities.
please me much :)

As for the screenshots themselves, looks good. Obvioulsy at an early stage so can't really judge yet.

Oh dear, the game is now a freakin' cartoon...

Oh dear, the game is now a freakin' cartoon...

As has been said more than fifty times now, the graphics will change later on... And even if they do not (doubt it), mods will come out.

The graphics will change! They aren't the final graphics! ;) (Hey, atleast you have Snoopy to ask for better graphics). BTW, since those graphics are down, does anyone remember if there were the same number of units in each stack? ...

I believe there were 4 (I know there were for the spearman), and I think there were 4 'warriors' too. :)

(Hey, atleast you have Snoopy to ask for better graphics).
Well, that may not be entirely true, CT... (http://www.apolyton.net/forums/showthread.php?postid=3476393#post3476393)

Saying that Firaxis makes games for kids is a strong statement, but I disagree with it somewhat.

all I'm praying for is a smart AI and NO BUGS

Wrapping from North to south would be nice.... but only if it were toggled.

Battles done in the same style as the "Total War" series?

Trade Routes. Say the Americans are trading Oil to Russia. I think it would be nice if you, we'll say you are Japan, would be able to attack the trade convoy, if it be by land, sea or air, and either destroy it or steal it.

Different Currency for every civ? A new "Economic" victory type?

:wallbash: Damn. came to late. Earliest I could buy the Magzine is monday. I think I am going to go nuts! :crazyeye:

Wrapping from North to south would be nice.... but only if it were toggled.

Battles done in the same style as the "Total War" series?

Trade Routes. Say the Americans are trading Oil to Russia. I think it would be nice if you, we'll say you are Japan, would be able to attack the trade convoy, if it be by land, sea or air, and either destroy it or steal it.



That would be kind of hard to do in a turnbased game where turns can represent decades, or years. You do that in a way in Civ3 if you're at war with a city. Their trade route can't flow through your territory.

(Hey, atleast you have Snoopy to ask for better graphics).

And if Sn00p isn't willing, I'm sure someone else will be.

I realize the the graphics will be better, but right now, they're worse than civ3 in many respects. civ3 made a deliberate attempt to 'lighten up' the graphics, which it did just fine. civ4 seems to be going for an almost cartoon-y look.
The lack of an HP bar worries me, as does the hype about "3D zoom" being a major feature.
As for what I hope for in this game, I want canals, north-south wrap, and Alpha Centauri-esque government editor (perhaps that's what the mysterious 'civics' are...)

North-south wrap? That's wierd... It doesn't make any sense realistically, and I don't think that it will improve the game any.

Hey guys, Chill-OK? I really don't want to see this turn into the acrimonious '***** fight' that we saw in the lead up to, and the months following, the release of civ3!!! I accept that vanilla civ3 didn't live up to ALL expectations, but the game was miles better than civ2, and they DID listen to us and make the improvements needed to get us to C3C-which I think is brilliant.

I, for one, am happy to show a little bit of faith, and reserve my judgement until closer to the release date!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

Huh, if you go to the north pole from Canada you end up in Siberia... Actually, on a more serious note, it would be great if the world was kind of round. I'm not sure how that would work I mean the game has to be flat locally but the idea of wrapping both east-west and north-south would be a first step. Another one would be to have the top and bottom parts of the map slightly narrower to give a sense of projection like a real map.

I too will reserve my judgments of the game when the date nears.

I'm very surprised some people are already making judgments of the very first images of a game that is just about a year away.
I mean, how do you link what has been shown, to what will finally come out?

Huh, if you go to the north pole from Canada you end up in Siberia... Actually, on a more serious note, it would be great if the world was kind of round. I'm not sure how that would work I mean the game has to be flat locally but the idea of wrapping both east-west and north-south would be a first step. Another one would be to have the top and bottom parts of the map slightly narrower to give a sense of projection like a real map.

Wrapping both directions makes a toroidal topology - in other words a donut. I personally don't think that this is any more realistic than the current cylindrical topology. Since easily crossing the poles wasn't really feasible till modern eras, the cylindrical model is a bit better, IMHO.

I haven't seen the screenshots, where can I see them now?

Noooooo! Tooo late.. Hmph.. Well I am not going to submit to the "man"!

I refuse!

So.... ah... can someone email scanned pics;) (since they can't be posted)

Hey, spare a thought for us poor Australians. If I'm not mistaken, I won't see THAT particular issue until around Mid to late January 2005 :( :mad: !!!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

I swear people don't read the bloody posts......

To Warpstorm: you're right. And with two entire courses in projective geometry I should have known that... Anyway, that's a good point about they being essentially impassable up until the 20th century so forget that. I guess my main point is that I'd like the maps not to be rectangles.

What I'm thinking is having the possibility of round maps. The minimap would be an actual sphere (the planet), but empty in the middle so you could see the main face and the one behind. The main map would still be rectangular and would correspond to a projection of a rectangle on the sphere. You'd play normally on the main map but on the global scale, you would actually be playing on a planet. You could also rotate the sphere in the minimap to get a better view. With this you could have ice caps at the poles, icebergs and a very planet-like feeling. Anyway, I've drifted a little...

Hey, spare a thought for us poor Australians. If I'm not mistaken, I won't see THAT particular issue until around Mid to late January 2005 :( :mad: !!!

Yours,
Aussie_Lurker.

At least you get it. The US version of PC Gamer have an agreement with the UK version to not distribute their magazines in each others' home country. Still other mags will no doubt pick up the screen shots after a month or so.

Wrapping both directions makes a toroidal topology - in other words a donut. I personally don't think that this is any more realistic than the current cylindrical topology. Since easily crossing the poles wasn't really feasible till modern eras, the cylindrical model is a bit better, IMHO.Couldn't agree more, Warpstorm.

Im also kinda hoping for a sniper/sharpshooter unit

No no! When people understand, that they aren't just one unit. This isn't chess. One unit consists thousands of men. Around 10 000 men in a unit would be "right" amount for this kind of game. That's why spearmen and legions are right units, because they can consist many of those kind of troops. Have you seen or heard of division made entirely of snipers?

It's alway ridiculous to see like in WW2 gigantic whole Europe/World scenarios, that scenario makers add units like "flamethrower" and "mg-infantry". They all can (and should) be in one unit - infantry. Then there can be like "heavy infantry" and "assault infantry", so it wouldn't be so irritanting unrealistic (even that is too, but it's better to have SOME variety in units)...
But in scenarios like landing in Normandy or something like that. Much more different units would make sense, because it is in smaller scale.

Please no multi-units!!! They look so crowdy without adding anything new.

Multi-figure units would be best graphic improvements for this game. It gives you the feeling, that you have armies or divisions, instead of one lousy spearman.
I agree, that in those screenies units are horrible. They just need little bit fixing - like filling the whole sqare with small warriors, would look nicer than few giants.

Little bit like Victoria-style units (in 3d of course):

http://www.eulatino.com.ar/victoria/screens/Victoria4.jpg


What comes to Squares vs. Hexes - squares are better. Why? Well, they can give unrealistic movement possibility (but it can be made more realistic, like using 2 mp's when moving NE, SW, or whatever that kind of direction), but it doesn't matter - have it matter this far? What matter is strategy. Squares allow more possibilities to attack to in one tile and such. Hexagons are so narrow, that it would result to just WW1-style battles...


Where are the other 2 screenies? :confused:

Where are the other 2 screenies? :confused:
There were only two scanned and posted on CFC.

zoom wouldnt work very well in a game like civilization. zoom is only cool when youre playing real time games and youre sending a huge army to cross a mountain or through enemy territory to invade someone. if you cant see them marching, then zoom isnt really needed. it could be needed if you wanna see pretty detail though, but detail is for sissies and lesser wimps. unless they somehow change the game to a somewhat a realtime game while in zoom, or the closer you zoom, the more troops appear on the square, then the effect is poo. the only good zoom would be zooming out so you could see the whole map.

Ginger_Ale found them here (http://civ3.de/www/content/index.php?cat=32). It's the German Civ3 site, but you can see the origanal pictures. Atleast until they're taken down...

zoom would work well if i wanted to see position of units on a larger scale. zoom will be more than eye candy

I have not been able to read through this entire thread, but has it been discussed why the terrain appears to be arranged in a nonisometric square grid (similar to Civ1's)? The fact that 3-D zoom is mentioned makes this even more strange.

Also, I agree with StabbingNirvana that zoom might not be as much of a change in Civ as in other games, where graphics have a very significant role in determining the quality of the game.

actually, looking at it on the german site, it (the game) doesnt look that bad .... also, to the guy that said zoom would be useful. it wouldnt. period

I disagree, StabbingNirvana, zoom would be very valuable to me. Not zoom in, but rather zoom out. I would like to see a lot more of the map at times than Civ3 allows.

Early screenshots of civ 3 also show the terrain in a civ1 style. I'm sure the gfx will change angles to isometric later.

[QUOTE=the only good zoom would be zooming out so you could see the whole map.[/QUOTE]

i said it would be the only useful zoom, as for zooming out though, it would be virtually useless.

is it just me, or does this look CR@P? oh deer me ... why do developers think that we are so shallow as to need pretty graphics to want to play a game? (oh, and by the way, this ain't pretty)

My $0.02 of ranting! (possibly in Euros, as it might be worth more ;)

I am with you on that one. The best memory I have of Civ I was the playability.

I definately hope the graphics are changed before the game comes out. :undecide:

Well, in the article Firaxis stated that the whole game will be easier for modders to fiddle with because of Python and XML - but if the graphics are 3D (+multi-units), animated, etc. pp - how many fans actually do have the ability, time and will to create custom animated 3D-multi-units for Civ4? I mean, for Civ3 it wasn´t easy, but doable, I´m pretty sure we won´t see as many graphic packs from fans for the next installment...
my 2cents

Grendel S.

I agree, GrendelS. Unless they release some kind of custom unit workshop with civ4 (not likely) we will probably be seeing far less custom units than we did with civ3, to the detriment of the game, IMO.

I wonder, if there are to be many new abilities gained thru experience, how exactly are they planning to indicate all these abilities on the individual unit stats? Let's say you've got a veteran Pikeman, who has learned the ability to defend at an increased value against swordsmen, has now a double defense against Knights, and horsemen, can use enemy roads, and can pacify conquered cities at an increased rate. Where are alll those abilities going to be shown? Seems to me they might need a whole new row of letters or other symbols on the unit somewhere, things could get pretty cluttered. Otherwise, you'd be right clicking on every unit all the time to remember its exact stats, which could get tedious.

Unless they limit each unit to only 1 or two abilities, that would help to keep things simple.

Unless they limit each unit to only 1 or two abilities, that would help to keep things simple.

Yeap ! It could be also "groupped skils" for each type of units, like in Panzer General. :rolleyes:

Regards

Ginger_Ale found them here (http://civ3.de/www/content/index.php?cat=32). It's the German Civ3 site, but you can see the origanal pictures. Atleast until they're taken down...

I'm guessing it won't be very long now that it's known... ;)

Well, in the article Firaxis stated that the whole game will be easier for modders to fiddle with because of Python and XML - but if the graphics are 3D (+multi-units), animated, etc. pp - how many fans actually do have the ability, time and will to create custom animated 3D-multi-units for Civ4? I mean, for Civ3 it wasn´t easy, but doable, I´m pretty sure we won´t see as many graphic packs from fans for the next installment...


I beg to differ. Many of the mod makers were already doing their models in 3D using the same packages that Firaxis uses. They will actually be more productive since they won't have the tedious step of rendering it down to 2D flcs.

Not only do I not have a $500 3D program (I don't even know what will save it in the format it uses), I am a terrible 3D artist. ;) But, things like icons (resources, popheads, etc), they're a simple 2D style, so I can easily add something to make it easier for me to see. I can't do that with 3D, unless I spend $500...

Even though I have a full time programming job now, it still seems expensive.

Not only do I not have a $500 3D program (I don't even know what will save it in the format it uses), I am a terrible 3D artist. ;) But, things like icons (resources, popheads, etc), they're a simple 2D style, so I can easily add something to make it easier for me to see. I can't do that with 3D, unless I spend $500...

Even though I have a full time programming job now, it still seems expensive.

$500? I got my 3D program for $41 :p And its a very good one two. :D

$500? I got my 3D program for $41 :p And its a very good one two. :D

Which one is that? The only major one I've heard of is 3D Studio Max...

And I looked around for the Gamebryo engine, and one of the only ones I found was that there's a plugin for 3D Studio Max for that game engine...


I don't think POV-Ray supports it. (unless I'm not looking hard enough).

(slightly OT - Go to the Gamebryo website, and you'll see a Pirates! screenshot).

CT, 3DS is a serious professional tool. Hobbyist level is 3D Canvas and Milkshape. These are fairly cheap, but not totally useless.

But do they support Gamebryo Graphics?

Which one is that? The only major one I've heard of is 3D Studio Max...


Bryce 5 from Daz 3D.:p

http://bryce.daz3d.com/#01

It's now $79 since mine was one sale when I got it.

Nothing supports Gamebryo directly. :) You have to have a convertor. NDL, with its Gamebryo package, supplies plugin convertors for Maya and Max to its NIF format. AFAIK, just buying Max won't let you export in such a way that it can be imported into Gamebryo. Firaxis will have to ship a translator from 3DS to NIF.

Ahh, Blender, totally free. I'm not good with 3-D at all, and have no time to make units, but I still have it.

Remember, people, we've got a year until Civ4 is released, and alot can happen between then. I do hope they ditch the multi-units, I'm not a big fan of that.

Remember, people, we've got a year until Civ4 is released,

Yeah. I know. I even plan to learn Python after Christmas so I can get a jump start on the game. :D

Hello, are we here to talk about Civ4 or about 3D programs???
I haven't been able to see the complete screens of Cvi4 because they have been moved before I visited it...
But i am looking forward to buy the magazine.
A lot of people are complaining about the "bad" graphics, but they should think that's just a preview... we are about 1 year away from the release of the game... and some months away from the release of the true graphics.
I am sure they'll be great, just see the evolution in the graphics from Civ1, Civ2 and now Civ3...
And about the new features, i think they should be quite more realistic than now, with things like elections, rebellions...
Well, this is supposed to talk about the new graphics, so I won't say anything more.

theres tons of free 3d programs out there. most artist will do the same thing as they did in Civ3. i don't think we will see less units but probably more. with 3d artist don't have to go through the 2d stuff which is what really discourages newcomers. most programs i think can export to 3DS. then Firaxis can take care of the rest.

For anyone who thinks the graphics look bad, compare some of the early shots of Civ 3 with the current game: ;)

Well, then what about the release gfx of Civ3 - weren't really anything good looking afaict :lol: :lol: :lol:

I want the oportunity to import civ3 flic units into civ4 :cry:

theres tons of free 3d programs out there. most artist will do the same thing as they did in Civ3. i don't think we will see less units but probably more. with 3d artist don't have to go through the 2d stuff which is what really discourages newcomers. most programs i think can export to 3DS. then Firaxis can take care of the rest.

You won't need more than two hands to count them all in since early 2002. :rolleyes:
And about the programs *sigh* you think wrong... and firaxis hasn't made a single unit for the community that wasn't in their expansions. So much to that, sorry.

W.i.n.t.e.r, that probably won't be possible (well, there is a way, but I rather the unit makers embrace 3D).

W.i.n.t.e.r, that probably won't be possible (well, there is a way, but I rather the unit makers embrace 3D).
Hm, I know, Warpstorm, I am part of a species in extinction ;). I'd love to see a module-based editor for the game, though (if 3d then we need a good program from start up). If i.e. Infantry could be assembled around a squeleton and different equipment, headgear, backpacks, heads, guns, textures, etc could be swapped in a firaxian editor that would be a cool way to make things better... though I'll be missing lots of units by wyrmshadow and Ripptide- they made so many :rolleyes:

Oh, one thing I also think that could (FINALY) be implemented by Firaxis (after three versions of civ1, two of civ2, three of civ3) are particular gfx for the capital city, instead of little stars and the like. :| There should be a historical Capital gfx for every civ: Paris with evolving appearance (Alesia with historic bridge, medieval Paris with Versailles or the Arc de Triomphe, then with the Eiffel Tower, finally the new Arc by the Fields of Mars).

Certainly this is more work for the team- yet the little stars are outdated by far, giving a certain feel of cheapness about them. I want a capital city that looks like one (Washington and its capitol, Berlin with the Reichstag and Gate, Moskva and the Kremlin). I have requested this in several forums eversince the announcement of civ2 in the 1990s... also a nice feature (and one up to the present technology) would be changing city gfx on the overall map view, once a wonder is built within them.

Why are you people complaining so much? Its Civ4 damnit. Be Happy!

(I will probably never see those scans anyway :))

Cuz I was there before they made civ2 and before they made civ3- and I have seen the many ways of making steps around creating a top quality game. So I complain in advance so I won't have to complain so much once the game is out and it should not be what was expected ;)

medieval Paris with Versailles or the Arc de Triomphe
LOL. Learn about France's history and get back with your ideas. ;)

finally the new Arc by the Fields of Mars
Which one is that ? :confused: The monument by the "Champs de Mars" is the Eiffel Tower, whereas the "new arc" is called the "Grande Arche" and is located in the Défense district outside the city of Paris.

Apart from that, your idea is nice but should be secondary.

Perfect- we already have a victim to give us input for France :P

(Knowing, of course that the edification of Versailles dates of a later period, I said medieval thinking of civ3s 4 ages- them having missed out reinaissance and industrialisation ;) ) its the details that make a game playworthy and fun

I have the PC Gamer mag -- I'm home for a few weeks, and my father has a subscription. Wasn't too impressed with the article, but, some other points:

1. World Religions will play an important game role, as well. Maybe it will have more to do with cultural conversions and the like, although the article said it will "affect the entire empire." I.e., a Christian French Empire in control of a Buddhist Khmer (please?) city would have more problems. This would mean less ethno-centric civil conflict (high Russian populations in an Arab-controlled city, as in Civ3).

2. Micro-management will be going down. Thank the Lord.

3. Combat has been revamped to strong-arm players into combining unit types for battles. You can also "upgrade" individual units and teach them new abilities, like specific defenses against other unit types, or abilities like using enemy roads.

Those are really the big ones for me as a gameplayer. What would I like to see? The ability to "claim" territory without actually having to build a dozen cities. Nothing is more irritating than building 70 cities in Siberia just to make a genuine Russian Empire on an Earth map. This would also cut down and the drastic need to REX so early. Blugh. Anything that cuts down on having to manufacture non-stop settles for the first 100 game turns would be greatly appreciated.

-Ben

Cant wait to part with my money

Ginger_Ale found them here (http://civ3.de/www/content/index.php?cat=32). It's the German Civ3 site, but you can see the origanal pictures. Atleast until they're taken down...
:lol: Now that page links back to this thread!

I found a site on Google that has the two images in high res. I don't think I'll post it tho, as the people from the magazine don't want it spreading around more.

You won't need more than two hands to count them all in since early 2002. :rolleyes:
And about the programs *sigh* you think wrong... and firaxis hasn't made a single unit for the community that wasn't in their expansions. So much to that, sorry.

what i mean is that Firaxis will provide the community with a 3DS to NIF(whatever file format) converter. i didn't mean provide us with more units. sorry for the misunderstanding

Removing micromanagment is a BAD idea to me.

Keep pollution, keep corruption, keep ALL that stuff and just add MORE!!

The more to control, the better!

If they truely are going to remove corruption and pollution and 'replace' them and remove the micromanagement, then I wont buy it. I hate games that brainless and require no thought and detail. I must have my hands in it, planing on how to deal with pollution, corruption, and I want even more to deal with. Removing these removes the reasons I liked Civ so much!

There's a difference between something requiring thought and needless micromanagement. Can you honestly say that you enjoy hunting down pollution tiles, watching them mess up city builds? Or that you like having a city or two riot out of hundreds simply because you're not babysitting every single city's happiness every turn?

Soren has said he's replaced pollution with a "health" system. He hasn't said much else, so we can't say what this entails yet, but I think there it could make the game much more fun in its own right, let alone as a replacement for pollution. That is what Soren and co. are trying to do - make the game more interesting and remove the tedius "check every city every turn to make sure it doesn't riot" kind of actions and replace them with things that require more planning and thinking, rather than busy-work.

What Trip said.

If the 'mechanical' parts of the game are steamlined, you'll have more time for strategic decisions.

:lol: Now that page links back to this thread!
damn it
now i'll won't be able to see those screenshots till its release here in sunny australia...

unless of course someone is kind enough to direct me to a site containing the sreenies *hint**hint* ;) ;)

They are on another site, but I don't want to get either CFC or the other site into trouble by posting the link. You could try a Google search.

(Hint: It's not an English language site)

There's a difference between something requiring thought and needless micromanagement. Can you honestly say that you enjoy hunting down pollution tiles, watching them mess up city builds? Or that you like having a city or two riot out of hundreds simply because you're not babysitting every single city's happiness every turn?


Yes I can. I love the fact I have chase pollution down and manage the happiness of each city!! That's what makes it so fun!

Well, you can keep playing Civ 3 then. ;) :D

Yes I can. I love the fact I have chase pollution down and manage the happiness of each city!! That's what makes it so fun!
How long have you been playing Civ3 ? Because after 18 months of playing this game (and not much this year BTW) I have completely enough of babysitting cities without having a control on the events. First, this is not fun at all. Second, it isn't micro-management, it is something that destroys my micro-management. :mad: Third, it is a random process, so talk about the strategic implications elsewhere. Fourth, it's completely unrealistic ; the only historical event that makes me think a "tile" could be useless is Tchernobyl in Ukraine, 1986 ; C3C's craters are just a plain joke as well. Fifth, we all know you'll change your mind once Soren comes up with the whole idea (at least, what I believe). So stop whining, and stop thinking that only adding stuff is good. I hope it isn't an American trait ! :eek: (or How to become anti-American while visiting CFC :( )

Gee, and I thought it was only the Americans who were stereotypical... :p

There's no need to insult the guy, he said he doesn't want it removed, that's his opinion.

I think Nexushyper would make the ideal bean-counter.

@Krzysztof: Craters are only ridiculous if you think of them as actual craters. Think of them as the more-or-less inevitable devastation of war, and they make tolerable sense.

So, UFO enemy Unknown is back with it's 3d world and a perfect implemented zoom...

Just hope that this "simplification" talking doesn't go the wrong way... Some things could be simplified, but not many. Risk is to made it too simple. Or to cut essential things.

But my biggest hope is that it's completelly moddable, including the AI, and some people here could do better AI systems, and better and better... And then we could enter in specialized AIs (for Deathmatch, for Regicide,...).


I just hope GRAPHICS doesn't come as "TOYS for BABIES" as WarcraftIII, that I recused to play due to graphics. And those pics didn't confort me...

Why 3D games nowadays seem to hav units like Ballons?
I remember that ballons in form of dogs, clowns, etc when I see Warcraft3 for example. Luckily, Battle for Middle Earth seems not to be the case, but again that pics really put me in maximum alert...

PLEEEEEEAAASE in the final version beware of the graphics. Let me buy CIV4...