The Style of Civ

Status
Not open for further replies.
The style of the older Civ games never actually seemed more "Mature" or "realistic" to me, it looked blocky and pixelated (Civ1) or dull and undetailed (Civ3).

It seems like that whole Zelda: Windwaker thing ("Zelda, moar liek Celda! Amirite?"), only this time it's more like "Civilization, moar liek cartoonilization! LAWL! Sid Meier? Moar liek KID Meier! LOL!". Really, only teenagers insecure about their own maturity would be bothered by the graphics. If you need to play dark and edgy M-rated games to feel like a man then chances are you aren't one.

:clap:

That's it. I just can't believe the attitude of the OP actually exists. It feels like I've seen this reaction with so many things before, it's tedious. I don't think Civ will become more or less cartoonish, they'll just keep making some Civ games that vary in their flavour and texture. I don't think we're going in one or direction or the other. CivRev is CivRev, and no one can really say anything about it yet. Already whining about the downfall of the whole series because of a "spinoff" game that isn't really in the series to start with, I dunno.

Now sorry, I am an adult and appreciate complex and mature games like Civ, I will go away and write a dissertation about the downfall of my favourite game while I enjoy a cup of Pinot Noir.
 
:clap:

That's it. I just can't believe the attitude of the OP actually exists. It feels like I've seen this reaction with so many things before, it's tedious. I don't think Civ will become more or less cartoonish, they'll just keep making some Civ games that vary in their flavour and texture. I don't think we're going in one or direction or the other. CivRev is CivRev, and no one can really say anything about it yet. Already whining about the downfall of the whole series because of a "spinoff" game that isn't really in the series to start with, I dunno.

Now sorry, I am an adult and appreciate complex and mature games like Civ, I will go away and write a dissertation about the downfall of my favourite game while I enjoy a cup of Pinot Noir.

Exactly, the Civ series had spinoffs before, some good (Colonization, SMAC), some bad (CtP1, CtP2 was okay), and some ugly (Test of Time).

Most of them didn't effect the series they were based on (With a few exceptions, like cultural borders,tech quotes, etc) and I doubt this one will be any different.

Colonization didn't turn the series into a micromanagement nightmare, SMAC didn't put a greater emphasis on story and atmosphere, ToT didn't turn the series into the leading cause of eyecancer.
 
The only system I own that Civ Rev is coming out on is the DS. I'm quite sure that whatever direction they take, the graphics on the DS will be pretty bad. :( There simply isn't enough power on the hardware to make it very good. But the graphics really don't bother me so much as long as the gameplay is as fun and addicting as Civ always is. :)

But if they did adopt the PS3 graphics or something similar for Civ 5 I wouldn't be bothered in the least. I would rather take something unrealistic but interesting over extreme realism any day.

P.S. Hey don't go knocking Test of Time. :p As terrible as it was it was the game that first got me interested in Civilization. But looking back I have to agree with you, it is pretty terrible. Since I've gotten other Civ games I've never once played Test of Time.
 
I hate cartoony lanscapes in civ games especially if they lack detail. I don't mind cartoony leaderheads for some reason.
 
I think the graphics style emphasizes the fact that Civ is not supposed to be an accurate simulation of anything nor does it have a really serious premise; rather, it's a very fun game.

Personally, I like the style but I hate the lack of consistency (with Civ4). They should develop characters rather than continuously re-inventing them, i.e. the hatable face of Monezuma in Civ4 is the same hatable face you'll see in CivRev.

Now, if they can just a little bit more not-so subtle humor. For example: the adviser arguments in Civ2, which were very funny and informative.
 
Businesses straying from their core competencies.... mmm always a good idea.

I would argue the majority of those that make up the "core" of the civ fan-base don't really care what the game looks like.
 
I think the graphics style emphasizes the fact that Civ is not supposed to be an accurate simulation of anything nor does it have a really serious premise; rather, it's a very fun game.

Personally, I like the style but I hate the lack of consistency (with Civ4). They should develop characters rather than continuously re-inventing them, i.e. the hatable face of Monezuma in Civ4 is the same hatable face you'll see in CivRev.

Now, if they can just a little bit more not-so subtle humor. For example: the adviser arguments in Civ2, which were very funny and informative.

well the advisors do funny things in civ rev apparently, like the militeary advisor pushes everyone around.
 
So long as they expand on things like diplomacy, borders and economy (randomly added uncontrollable inflation?) I have no problem with kiddy graphics style.

People are just worried they add new kiddy graphics instead of making serious in-depth improvements to the game.

Sort of like how they raise the system requirements with civ4 from civ3 by adding 3d. 3d adds nothing to the game play mechanics in civ4. So you've got to run it on a newer pc for no real reason.

Don't get me wrong civ4 has some good improvements. 3d didn't add anything though. Maybe in civ5 eh.
 
It's allot easier to do a 3d model then it is to do a 3d model and then animate it as 2d image that moves, attacks, etc in eight directions.

There's your reason.
 
Those looking for an "expanded" and "deeper" game in CivRev WILL be disappointed and complain. It also depends on your definition of depth, CHESS is a deep game and it doesn't have civics, tech trees and inflation in it.

CivRev is BUILT FOR consoles, so it will simplify a lot of things to make sure turns can run faster and smoother. It's a different style, a different flavour, and basically a different series. So bashing it and comparing it to the Civ 1-4 and seeing it as Civ 5 is wrong.

In retrospect, not the right thread. Whatever.
 
I agree it may still be civ, buts its gonna be quite different from civ 1-4, so if it the demo doesn't impress, stick to the pc, jsut stop winging about it.

Personally i'm really looking forward to civ rev, fast gameplay, great graphics, sounds fun to me.
 
Graphics are purely a matter of personal preference. Civ3's style fit that game very well. I find Civ4's work well for it.

CivRev is a simpler game, and the simpler "cartoony" graphics work for it, IMHO, as well.

Oatse is right about 2D graphics. Civ3's graphics were all done as 3D, and then hand-adjusted to work in a 2D environment. Very time-consuming (and costly). For Civ4, they just kept them as 3D. (However, one thing he said wrong: CTP and CTP2 were not true spinoffs from Civ. They were "ripoffs" by a totally separate company. The others were all done by Sid & co.)
 
It's allot easier to do a 3d model then it is to do a 3d model and then animate it as 2d image that moves, attacks, etc in eight directions.

There's your reason.

As a 3D modeller, and a long-time Civ III modder, I beg to differ: Using programs that don't cost over $3000, it's virtually impossible to make the kind of ugly, low-poly models that you'll need to make for such a game (unless, of course, one happens to have access to the the National Security Administration's or NASA's mainframe computers).

On the other hand, making graphics for Civ III is fairly easy, even using low-cost (as in less than $200) programs and freeware stuff that uses wierd/unsupported file formats (i.e. POV Ray, Bryce, Poser, etc). That is one of the reasons why I refuse to buy Civ IV (among many others). If they were going to go 3D, they should have licensed the Havoc II engine from Ensemble/Microsoft... I've played games of AoE III with over 800 animated units, animated 3D environments (including individual trees numbering in the thousands, flocks of birds, herds of animals, etc), and even on med-low detail settings, the game STILL looked better than Civ IV on HIGH detail. What's even more impressive is that all of this is happening in Real-time, and my 6-year-old Pentium 4 could handle it quite well, even before I upgraded the video card and memory.

IMHO, if firaxis could combine the best features of Civ II Test of Time and Civ III Conquests, they'd have the perfect Civ game.

As for Civ Revolution... I kinda aggree that it looks cartoony, but seeing as (1) it's a console game, and (2), from what I've seen so far, is almost more of an RPG than a typical strategy game, I don't mind too much... it aught to fit right in with the re-release of Final Fantasy Tactics or Final Fantasy Tactics: Advanced. ;)
 
It's allot easier to do a 3d model then it is to do a 3d model and then animate it as 2d image that moves, attacks, etc in eight directions.

There's your reason.

I said game play not making 3d models. Unless you consider modeling game play of some sort.

I've got a hard time believing doing the entire game over again in 3d was cheaper/easier for them than using the existing 2d engine and whatnot.
 
/whacks forehead

@Civinator: It seems to me that you are being a complete a** by constantly criticizing, not just the civrev graphics, but also its supporters. (not to mention civ4.)

@Oatse: Hypocrisy is always a bad thing, but in this case you have made it worse by also making use of sarcasm to jibe at Civinator and his remarks, no matter how wrong you think they are.

I'm just getting the feeling that this thread is degenerating from an already barely-civilized argument to a series of personal attacks.
 
/whacks forehead

@Civinator: It seems to me that you are being a complete a** by constantly criticizing, not just the civrev graphics, but also its supporters. (not to mention civ4.)

The only persons who started to get personal in this thread were three people among them you. If you don´t believe this, please reread the posts in this thread. So your posting only falls back to yourself.

About the critics on the Civ Rev graphics I can write my opinion here as you can write yours. Of course I respect other opinions, especially if they are well based on arguments. But until now there were no arguments here, why Firaxis is doing the earthmap and the style of the cities (different angles in an overcartoonisized world) so extremly well.

I suggest you set me on your ignore-list as I did this with Oatse and now with you and we save a lot of time. :)
 
Since you mentioned it, I might as well put you on my ignore list aswell, It's not like you ever listen to anyone besides yourself anyway.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom