GameSpot has posted a four page preview of the first title of Big Huge Games (BHG), the company co-founded by several former Firaxians who left Firaxis in March 2000: Brian Reynolds, Tim Train, David Inscore, and Jason Coleman. Brian Reynolds was the main programmer on Civilization II and Alpha Centauri.

Titled Rise of Nations, this game is a 3D real time strategy game that "attempts to capture the enormous scope of older turn-based strategy games and the fast-paced structure of real-time strategy games". The game will have many concepts familiar to Civers, such as advanced diplomatic options, national borders, automated workers, ancient to information ages, bombardment, named cities, and units ranging from spearman to nuclear weapons. Rise of Nations may well be the 3D Real Time version of Civilization!

The preview includes a total of 11 first screenshots from the game that resemble the graphics of the Age of Empires series to some extent. The tentatively release date is Early 2003 and it will be published by Microsoft.

http://gamespot.com/gamespot/stories/previews/0,10869,2850780,00.html

Looks promising, I especially like:

The game has already been in playable form for quite some time, but Big Huge Games doesn't expect to complete its work until early 2003.

Wow. From reading the article, it sounds like it could be really good. But like you said, TF, the graphics look really stuck in Age of Kings. REALLY stuck. I suppose that's what they're working on until spring 2003.





PS Ummm... isn't this off-topic forum material though?

Yes it does look alot like AOK, but I dont understandhow they can mesh the two. But if it works, Goodbye Civ3.

We should create a suggestion board for this, and make it clear that the game needs to be custumzable and have a map editor with a f**cking mini map.

yea ... this game looks promicing ... much like empire earth .... but im hoping more of a world map type thing ... like in civ series (i was dissapointed by empire earth ... but it is a big ask!!), and actually ... i really dont think it will work, not quite yet that is, i dont think that the 4X gaming genere has matured and advanced enough to make a good real time game, there really needs to be another revolution in turn based 4x gaming before it goes real time IMHO that is ;) ... but then .. brian renolds had the forsight and vision to make AC the game it was, so there is still hope for a NEW game

i did notice that there was the PROMICE of multiplayer ... so that is cool :) .... and it is nice to hear that "they" dont wish to rush it? well .... we will see

Originally posted by Sparrowhawk
PS Ummm... isn't this off-topic forum material though?

It is a bit off-topic, but the Civ3 General forum is pretty much the forum for discussion of this kind of "Civish" news. ;) Just a week or two ago we were discussing the upcoming Civilization board game in this forum...

Back to topic: The game sounds very interesting. It probably will be even more interesting if they add roads and railroads to the game.

Originally posted by Thunderfall It is a bit off-topic, but the Civ3 General forum is pretty much the forum for discussion of this kind of "Civish" news. ;)
Agreed.

Back to topic: The game sounds very interesting. It probably will be even more interesting if they add roads and railroads to the game.

Good point. Hadn't thought of that myself, but I suppose if they really want to make a civ-ish game they'll have to include roads and such. In retrospect it seems that current RTS could benefit from road construction...

Originally posted by Thunderfall


Back to topic: The game sounds very interesting. It probably will be even more interesting if they add roads and railroads to the game.

now the big question is if those railroads will have unlimited movement ;) and if the baddies will be able to use your roads when they invade .... now i think of it .... is silly that no rts has ever had roads that u could build ... it makes sence and in a rts would be so easy to implement, u just have to make units move so much faster along the roads

The most irritating aspect of the great game of AOK and AOE is that you need to micromanage the villagers the entire game as well as continually plant new farms. The (intelligent) automation of these will be a great improvement. Especially if you have so many option to tweak their 'intelligence' as in Civ 3.

Although I like the graphics of AOK a lot, I think they should alter the appearance so it becomes a game in its own right, not just a clone of the AOE-series. (Or is it just that?????)

The (rail)road idea Thunderfall mentioned is a great idea IMHO.

i would prefer the map to be civ-style, it would be easier to make custom or real world maps.

and after playing civ3 for some time, i am so used to the civ3-style of presenting your empire that i am a bit turned-off by the AOE style interface as in Rise of Nations. in civ3, your empire really does look like a huge empire that spans continents. in AOE style interface, your empire looks nothing more than a tiny settlement, at most a conglomeration of small towns.

but from the screenshots and review, i think it not much more than an extension of AOE. it's basically AOE in 3D with civ3 features. but the idea of advancing through ages and having borders and diplomacy in the game is cool.

and i think the nuclear holocaust screenshot is amazing...:crazyeyes

Even if its just empire earth with diplomacy it'll be cool :) I liked empire earth until I realized it was just a fancy starcraft/AOE. I still like EE actually, but its more of a once a month type of thing rather than an addiction like civ2/3 and moo1/2 are :P

Personally though I think the moo3 team has the right idea on how to blend RTS with turn based play, and I hope their game is so successful that other developers borrow the idea of making a kick ass turn based game and only doing the battles in real time. Beyond that, I hope its successful enough to see a moo4 :)

In any case, Im sure this game will be pretty awsome when its released, maybe not the next civ, but at least the next big RTS title.

Originally posted by Michelangelo
Although I like the graphics of AOK a lot, I think they should alter the appearance so it becomes a game in its own right, not just a clone of the AOE-series. (Or is it just that?????)

The (rail)road idea Thunderfall mentioned is a great idea IMHO.

Let's see, there are two general options, no?

Copy the graphics from somewhere else for now, and concentrate work on developing good gameplay
Copy the gameplay, and concentrate on graphics


Dunno about you, but I would rather play a good game than a pretty one.

Cheers,
Shawn

The game sounds very interesting. Reynolds did a great job with Colonization, Civ II and SMAC, so this looks worth waiting for. Reading the Gamespot preview, it sounds as though he's been reading the complaints in this forum as he mentioned stuff like tanks vs spearmen and borders etc.

I agree that gameplay is much more important than graphics.

Originally posted by Selous
i did notice that there was the PROMICE of multiplayer ... so that is cool :) .... and it is nice to hear that "they" dont wish to rush it? well .... we will see

When I was talking about this game with BHG a year ago over lunch :cool:, they pretty much said that multi-player was the whole point of their new game.

I don't mean to offend or rain on anyone's parade but I'd like to share my opinion.


I've never been a fan of RTS strategy games for a couple of reasons.

1. They're nothing more than clickfests that make
me nervous.

2. It's the same formula, collect a bunch of resources
fast, build a bunch of buildings and units, go attack
your enemies really really fast before they rush you.

True there will be national borders, non-depleting resources, and fresh new graphics but I'm a little skeptical. However, because the game will have Brian Reynolds name on it I probably will pick it up and give it a chance. He's a pretty innovative guy. But I will not get burned this time and will take the game back if it's just another AoE/AoK Galactic Battlegrounds clone. You know what aaaah mean? ;)

Looks a little too much like AOK for my tastes.....and really, isn't it going to be just impossible to co-ordinate your development when there are so many things to take care of all at once? They even admit this, in the part where they mention that workers will automate themselves and build buildings without your consent......what the hell? Most of the fun of strategy gaming is making decisions about what to build, and where.....I don't want the AI to decide that for me. The game looks pretty good though, I dunno, might be worth a try......

Originally posted by -proletarian-
They even admit this, in the part where they mention that workers will automate themselves and build buildings without your consent......what the hell? Most of the fun of strategy gaming is making decisions about what to build, and where.....I don't want the AI to decide that for me. The game looks pretty good though, I dunno, might be worth a try......

If there's one thing I've decided from previous RTS experience, and by using cheats to look at AI cities in AOK, it's that the AI has no sense whatsoever when planning cities. The last thing I want is villagers spontaneously building. I hope the BHG team has sorted this stuff out, 'cause otherwise it looks like an intriguing game.

This looks exactly like AoE, I wouldn't be surprised if they even got sued for this.

Originally posted by MummyMan
This looks exactly like AoE, I wouldn't be surprised if they even got sued for this.

Not likely. "Rise of Nations" is being published by Microsoft, the same fun people who brought you AoE and AoK.

Originally posted by MummyMan
This looks exactly like AoE, I wouldn't be surprised if they even got sued for this.

Dude! When you develop a game you use working graphics. A developer makes the game but needs graphics to test the game as it grows. Sometimes these graphics are just simple stick figures. My guess is that they are working on the graphics right now. Because the graphics arn't ready they make simple ones or for screen shots use graphics allready made.

A developer makes the game but needs graphics to test the game as it grows. Sometimes these graphics are just simple stick figures.

Good point... It's not much different from the development process of Civ3 and SimGolf. I heard Firaxis used lots of SMAC graphics assets for Civ3 and Dinosaurs graphics assets for SimGolf in the beginning.

It's very amazing that the Gamespot preview is the only info BHG released to the public about their game in 1.5 years. They are even more secretive than Firaxis. :p ;)

Back to the railroads question though, they should not provide unlimited movement, but be like in CTP where you get fast, but not unlimited.

The baddies should be able to use your roads at least, and even youy railroads, if they are connected to thier railroads.

I don’t think that Brian Reynolds would start his own company with a AOE clone. He would be spelling death to his plans if he would do it.

From what I could see, it seems that they are going for a hybrid approach. Some elements would be essentially TBS (empire management) and others would be RTS (combat on a tactical level). In fact, this is what BR himself seems to indicate:

quote:

"It's not so much that we've taken real-time strategy and jammed the kitchen sink into it. We looked at real-time strategy and took what we thought were the really fun things."



I’m sure that BR can bring new ideas and features to an already exhausted genre. So far, I like the graphics, and some of the ideas seem pretty interesting. Of course, as Yin said, the devil is in the details, and I would have to play the game to see how it performs.

But one thing reveals a good sign of things to come: the game, as it is now, seems playable, and won’t be released until 2003, which means that the development team will have probably an entire year to fine tune it. And this means a game with fewer bugs and properly finished.

Sure, I never liked RTS games. Maybe I’ll give Rise of Nations a try. We’ll see.

:scan:

There's not just a Gamespot preview... there's also a preview at IGN (http://pc.ign.com/articles/354/354570p1.html)
As for Rise of Nations, it looks great... I like both TBSes and RTSes, and Brian Reynolds' games are great (Civ 2 especially), so I'm looking forward to it...

looks like aoe2 with strategy.

Mmmm. I wish I had Empire Earth... Oh wait! I DO have Empire Earth! :D Sorry. Habit from before I got Empire Earth. ;)

Anyway, Rise of Nations does look pretty cool. Borders and "flavor" units for civ's do look pretty neat. I'll download the demo in the future and try it out. If it's cool, I'll buy it.

I bought Empire Earth and found it to be unplayable garbage. Even on the 'easy' level of difficulty it was impossible to build up your town without being constantly attacked. Ridiculous! The game might please 12 year olds, but it does little for most adults.

I like both RTS games (including EE!) and TBS games, so RoN looks to me like it has the potential to combine the best of both worlds; indeed, from what I've seen so far it looks a lot like the game I hoped EE would be when I first heard about it. Of course, it could fail to live up to expectations, and I not only understand the reservations of those who wonder how well the combination of RTS and TBS elements will work out in practice, I also share the reservations of those who wonder how a game of such apparently epic scope can be played in an hour. That said, I like the idea that one could play it that fast if one so wanted, provided that it was equally viable to play rather longer games. I assume this will be made viable through the game setup options.

As to the first reservation, I tend to share the opinion of those who suspect that Brian Reynolds knows what he's doing and is far more likely to come up with a combination that works well that a bungler's muddle that doesn't. Assuming that a demo is made available I look forward to giving it a try, but I strongly suspect that RoN will turn out to be one of my key game purchases in 2003.

I expect the game to be good. :D After looking at CivII and SMAC, then comparing to CivIII, I also now think that Brian Reynolds may be the majority-mind behind the games we love so much.

That said... there are reservations. This game straddles RTS and turn based. Either it captures both, or its likely going to fall in the abysmal gap between the two...

this kind of game was excactly what i was thinking about while mowing the yard! it freaked me out when i read the beginning of the forum. thats weird i was thinking that it would be cool if they came out with an RTS version of civilization. behold! civilization IV: RTS. why did reynolds leave firaxis anyway?

here's another great preview, http://www.heavengames.com/ads/e3-2002/ron-preview1.shtml

As far as I know, Brian Reynolds will be smart enough to make a great game, although i do have reservations about RTS in general. Oh, and about the roads, remember Gettysburg?

someone said aok doesn't look like empires but little settlements?
you haven't ever played a good long game have you?

anyway, RoN will have cities. that will make it look like empires.


about roads.. you can't build roads or railroads i think.. but to make it look good, and empire-like, roads automatically appear when you have more than 1 city and those cities start trading.