Abaddon
Deity
I think since the move to 3D the graphics have been terrible.. but at the same time i realise they are irrelevant for a game like this.. give me 2Disometric any day!!
What's with all the hate?
- Thread starter XxtraLarGe
- Start date
Xavier Von Erck
Warlord
- Joined
- May 12, 2003
- Messages
- 144
Read the interviews by Meier about the game. He's out-and-out said that this will be a departure and built for people like his teenage son. All of the interviews by both Meier and other Firaxis developers have been subtly-insulting Civ for the PC too, such as quotes about needing to make it "more entertaining."
A complete single player game will take one and a half to three hours to finish.
Does that sound like a legitimate version of Civ to you? Really now.
Just because some things are different doesn't mean its not civ.
- Joined
- May 5, 2005
- Messages
- 8,900
I made some posts at CFC, why I prefer Civ 3 to Civ IV. The term you are using for civers who don´t share your opinion, is falling back to the one who uses that term, in this case to you, Intricacy.
And now to your two questions:
1) I don´t play multiplayer.
2) It´s not a "fear of the future" but a sadness, that a game I did like, from my point of view, consequently moves in the wrong direction.
The cartoonish style that started with Civ 3 with some units (tank, transport, bombers, leaderheads)and culminated with Civ IV is now consequently been followed by FIRAXIS to make the whole globe cartoonish too. I was really shocked by some screenshots about the new cartoonish graphical look of cities on the globe in Civ Rev. The single cities on the cartoonish small globe and even sometimes single houses are standing on that globe like an exploded toilette brush showing in different cartoonish angles.
I want a more historical design of a Civ game, not a Mikey-Mouse-game.
I hope another company uses the gap, that is enlarging permanently, between the players who like that "Mickey-Mouse-Style" FIRAXIS is doing consequently since CIV IV and continues with Civ Rev, and civers who don´t like that style for a new turn based Civilization game.
I grew up with CivIII and CivIV will just never do it for me.
Dont get me wrong its a great game and i enjoy playing it but i just like CivIII better.
CivRev will be more suited to some people than others, its what happens when they make such big changes to the game. eg CivIII - CivIV
As for the people spamming up the CivIV forums about how III is better maybe they should go play some?
Dont get me wrong its a great game and i enjoy playing it but i just like CivIII better.
CivRev will be more suited to some people than others, its what happens when they make such big changes to the game. eg CivIII - CivIV
As for the people spamming up the CivIV forums about how III is better maybe they should go play some?
Tboy
Future world ruler
Why can't this game live alongside normal civ? Want a simplified, easier to get into game, which can also be portable, play revolutions. Want the more indepth version, play on PC. And since there is probably a separate team for revolutions, it shouldn't detract from the PC game.
Really, just because you don't like the game, doesn't mean you have to spout hate about it (apologies to those who don't like it but don't spam).
Really, just because you don't like the game, doesn't mean you have to spout hate about it (apologies to those who don't like it but don't spam).
GarretSidzaka
Deity
you know, i probably won't buy this because i don't console game. but any game that brings intelligence and complexity to console, even a "dumbed down" civ, is a good thing.
WerBackIII
Jar of the Rotting Brain
It's not the game, man.
When the announcement of the new Halo was made, I heardd people asking what is a strategy and how it's played. I wonder how would you made a Turn-based Strategy for a PSP or Wii without ruinning the whole game. CivRev will win not fans, but a bad name!
When the announcement of the new Halo was made, I heardd people asking what is a strategy and how it's played. I wonder how would you made a Turn-based Strategy for a PSP or Wii without ruinning the whole game. CivRev will win not fans, but a bad name!
Gozert
Chieftain
Seriously, why would you wonder that? Hell, the Game Boy Advance could manage some nice turn-based strategy games. Sure, Fire Emblem and Advance Wars might not have the same depth of strategy like Civilization, but they were very enjoyable. Besides, the Wii even has mouse-like controls and way more power than a PC that can run Civ 3 perfectly... Or was that a bad game too?
Byrath
Peacenik
My newest console is a PS1 so I certainly won't be playing this game .. not that it concerns me, since what I'm hearing about it does sound truly awful. A two-hour long game of Civ, I can't even imagine.
I wouldn't actually mind for Civ to be a simpler game in some respects... less micro-management of units would be ok with me, especially in regards to warfare, warfare in Civ is very tedious for me (probably in part because I am quite a micro-manager when given the chance). Overall, more choices on the 'grand' scale and less on the 'micro' scale would suit me well. Things like city placement, finding my best path through the techs and civics is what I really enjoy. Maybe CivRev is exactly what I wish for (doubt it though, 2 hour games!
), we'll see as it gets closer to release.
I have my doubts that CivRev will sell very well to console gamers who aren't familiar with Civilization ... wouldn't be surprised if 2/3 of their sales are to PC Civ gamers Maybe if they do a lot of effective advertising for it, or if its just incredibly good.
As far as the sentiment that console gamers are either young or just plain dumb, I think that is wrong... I tried playing a friends PS2 once and there were so many freaking buttons and controls on the gamepad, I gave up in disgust after less than an hour, and I'm really not that good at action oriented games on PC either. What I am trying to say is that intelligence comes in many forms, your auto mechanic probably isn't a rocket scientist but he's pretty darn smart when it comes to fixing your car.
I wouldn't actually mind for Civ to be a simpler game in some respects... less micro-management of units would be ok with me, especially in regards to warfare, warfare in Civ is very tedious for me (probably in part because I am quite a micro-manager when given the chance). Overall, more choices on the 'grand' scale and less on the 'micro' scale would suit me well. Things like city placement, finding my best path through the techs and civics is what I really enjoy. Maybe CivRev is exactly what I wish for (doubt it though, 2 hour games!
), we'll see as it gets closer to release.I have my doubts that CivRev will sell very well to console gamers who aren't familiar with Civilization ... wouldn't be surprised if 2/3 of their sales are to PC Civ gamers
Maybe if they do a lot of effective advertising for it, or if its just incredibly good.As far as the sentiment that console gamers are either young or just plain dumb, I think that is wrong... I tried playing a friends PS2 once and there were so many freaking buttons and controls on the gamepad, I gave up in disgust after less than an hour, and I'm really not that good at action oriented games on PC either. What I am trying to say is that intelligence comes in many forms, your auto mechanic probably isn't a rocket scientist but he's pretty darn smart when it comes to fixing your car.
Swedishguy
Deity
Oh, your opinion. Too bad, saint Dezzilisk, but your opinion doesn't always reflect how it really is. I also grew up with CivIII. Now, CivIV has a revolutionary new layout that is simply more fun than CivIII. Please, stop being a conservative Civgamer!
Dezzilisk... is that supposed to be a crossbreed between Death and a Basilisk? Sheesh.
- Joined
- May 5, 2005
- Messages
- 8,900
And with your opinion this could be the same...
Swedishguy, do you have something to contribute to the Civ Rev thread, or do you only want to abuse that thread for your Civ 4 vs Civ 3 propaganda?
carmen510
Deity
Also, CivRev could help fund Civilization 5. After all, C&C3 came out good, and it was released for consoles.
Civ in my opinion is the best single player experience on the PC. The multiplayer aspect if you have the time and patience (as I did in my college years) is the best in PC gaming as well.
The reality unfortunately is that for most people, they can't spend a 'lost weekend' playing multiplayer civ, and playing one game piecemeal over a month or two can be agonizing as well. So something like Revolutions fits great for time constrained multiplayer (which is virtually all multiplayer).
It would also work great for quick 'on the go' civ for civ veterans on portable devices, the civ newbie who wants to be eased into the genre, and of course the young gamer.
Take a look at a game like RoN (Rise of Nations), you can realistically play a multiplayer match in a few hours which can be done reasonably (even several rounds) at a typical LAN game, or say a Friday night of online gaming. I think Civ could use a simplified, faster paced version for quick multiplayer gaming. I think Revolutions will be complementry to the traditional epic PC game. If something like Revolutons were to replace normal Civ I would be screaming bloody murder... but we all know that will never happen... why would firaxis spoil the gravy train? Even if they did you would still have Civ 1-4 (and MOOII
)and some other game developer would pick up the torch where Firaxis dropped it, and build an awesome civ-like turn based strategy game.
The reality unfortunately is that for most people, they can't spend a 'lost weekend' playing multiplayer civ, and playing one game piecemeal over a month or two can be agonizing as well. So something like Revolutions fits great for time constrained multiplayer (which is virtually all multiplayer).
It would also work great for quick 'on the go' civ for civ veterans on portable devices, the civ newbie who wants to be eased into the genre, and of course the young gamer.
Take a look at a game like RoN (Rise of Nations), you can realistically play a multiplayer match in a few hours which can be done reasonably (even several rounds) at a typical LAN game, or say a Friday night of online gaming. I think Civ could use a simplified, faster paced version for quick multiplayer gaming. I think Revolutions will be complementry to the traditional epic PC game. If something like Revolutons were to replace normal Civ I would be screaming bloody murder... but we all know that will never happen... why would firaxis spoil the gravy train? Even if they did you would still have Civ 1-4 (and MOOII
)and some other game developer would pick up the torch where Firaxis dropped it, and build an awesome civ-like turn based strategy game.Yes IN MY OPINION, I am happy to say that I play both of them and enjoy both of them, i was just saying which one I like better.
And as to Civ IV having a 'revolitionary new layout that is simply more fun'?
Thats your opinion too.
And don't make fun of my name just because i said something you didnt like
Gilder
Deity
Odd, that's how long my normal CivIV games last.
XxtraLarGe
Warlord
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2005
- Messages
- 268
What the heck settings do you play on? Even on a quick game, my single player games usually take at least 6 to 10 hours!
Gilder
Deity
What the heck settings do you play on? Even on a quick game, my single player games usually take at least 6 to 10 hours!
Normal speed.
