I just totally agree with you. Just be careful not to repeat it too often here because some moderators may get angry :/
Sid Meier's Civilization VI announced!
- Thread starter Camikaze
- Start date
I just totally agree with you. Just be careful not to repeat it too often here because some moderators may get angry :/
Marla_Singer
United in diversity
Okay so this is civ5 version 2.
I'll stick with Civ4 then.
I'll stick with Civ4 then.
King Rad
Warlord
If you look closely, I think it looks like there are cliffs between the water and the land when the land is hilly, and beaches when the land is flat.
Acken
Deity
Any late game only mechanics would be nice. Bnw introduced archaeology and ideologies but yes things like corporations would be nice
Battlehelm043
Warlord
I've said enough about the graphics, as for the mechanisms in the game, hell yes I'm excited but I think many of us all know how it turned out in CiV vanilla. If the new mechanics mesh well with the BNW ones Beach says were left in place then this should provide pretty solid game play.
I do agree with the IGN interview where Beach mentioned how science and policies became repetitive. I have to consciously manage my games I'm playing now if I want to deviate from the go-to 4 city and tradition start. I also read in the IGN review that you can stack 2 of a kind to make a corps and 3 to make an army which is what you could do in Civ Rev. It would appear that they are kind-of re-hashing those mechanics for military units which has the potential to work or will be a complete disaster. If they do use that mechanic I would hope they will allow you to name units or at least the corps and armies without needing to earn a promotion first...
I know Civ Rev just chose for you, and while that was kinda neat at first it began to irritate as time went on, especially if you wanted to customize one of your best performing armies....
I do agree with the IGN interview where Beach mentioned how science and policies became repetitive. I have to consciously manage my games I'm playing now if I want to deviate from the go-to 4 city and tradition start. I also read in the IGN review that you can stack 2 of a kind to make a corps and 3 to make an army which is what you could do in Civ Rev. It would appear that they are kind-of re-hashing those mechanics for military units which has the potential to work or will be a complete disaster. If they do use that mechanic I would hope they will allow you to name units or at least the corps and armies without needing to earn a promotion first...
I know Civ Rev just chose for you, and while that was kinda neat at first it began to irritate as time went on, especially if you wanted to customize one of your best performing armies....
On combat, it will almost certainly improve a high level AI to have this new combat system. A) You have to tech level for it (helping AI that has mid-game tech lead), and B) AI carpet spam is crying out to mash 2 units together for 1.4 Strength, particularly with surrounding a city. 3) 1.4x melee pillaging your city districts will hurt if you're turtling with a classic line of range on a line with your city.
Particularly with 3 years of development, this should buff a classic civ AI that spams. If they can even manage marginal tactical improvement, these corps should be a new challenge against high level turtling, or attacking an AI without artillery.
And if it's an easily moddable system, the community can certainly toughen it up.
The combat stuff should be very entertaining, especially if they're incorporating what they've learned from the last 5 years. Spam AI with a 3:1 unit advantage desperately need to make that count in a limited he cluster. I'm encouraged by the preliminary possibilities.
Particularly with 3 years of development, this should buff a classic civ AI that spams. If they can even manage marginal tactical improvement, these corps should be a new challenge against high level turtling, or attacking an AI without artillery.
And if it's an easily moddable system, the community can certainly toughen it up.
The combat stuff should be very entertaining, especially if they're incorporating what they've learned from the last 5 years. Spam AI with a 3:1 unit advantage desperately need to make that count in a limited he cluster. I'm encouraged by the preliminary possibilities.
Also, for those interested: Huge amount of news/insight on IGN's 9-minute video with Beach and Shirk. Lots of little nuggets!
http://www.ign.com/videos/2016/05/12/civilization-6-developer-rewind-theater-ign-first
Edit:
By the way, they drop some especially interesting info on Basic AI Diplomacy. They say that the initial default AI Diplo available on first contact will be hostile/cautious. I wonder if on higher levels they will be curtailing a) AI deal gold (horses, iron, lux), and b) encourage the player to skirmish with an AI early on. We'll see how they implement that, but Shirk pretty clearly states that initial hostility is going to be the norm.
They also say the Great Work system will be "far more beautiful" and especially well integrated with completely new UI. The must have taken TheMeInTeam seriously
.
http://www.ign.com/videos/2016/05/12/civilization-6-developer-rewind-theater-ign-first
Edit:
By the way, they drop some especially interesting info on Basic AI Diplomacy. They say that the initial default AI Diplo available on first contact will be hostile/cautious. I wonder if on higher levels they will be curtailing a) AI deal gold (horses, iron, lux), and b) encourage the player to skirmish with an AI early on. We'll see how they implement that, but Shirk pretty clearly states that initial hostility is going to be the norm.
They also say the Great Work system will be "far more beautiful" and especially well integrated with completely new UI. The must have taken TheMeInTeam seriously
.I've spend countless thousands of hours playing Civ on my PC since Civ I. I loved II, III, and V, all for different reasons. I never, ever, got on with IV, for the simple reason that I couldn't hack the visuals.
For us old men who like long games on PCs, not quick fixes on phones, I hope they keep this playable for 30-hour gameplay on huge maps.
For us old men who like long games on PCs, not quick fixes on phones, I hope they keep this playable for 30-hour gameplay on huge maps.
Skulbow
The Lonely Cyclist
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2014
- Messages
- 113
I have really only played Civ V but my father has played them all and his favourite is Civ IV. I have had a little look at earlier versions and thought them more difficult to play than Civ V. Would I be correct with that asumption?
By the way I am in my 60's and my father is nearly 90. He was into computers since the late 70's and actually got me into them in the early 1990's when I was a wee lad of 40.
By the way I am in my 60's and my father is nearly 90. He was into computers since the late 70's and actually got me into them in the early 1990's when I was a wee lad of 40.
I'm pretty sure this will NOT be the type of Civ game most of us are hoping to see.
Please be aware that I base this soly on the screenshots and the little information I read about this. And I also base this on my gut feeling and what I have learned to expect from games and triple A companies in general.
From what I gather from all this, is that this will be a game that will be even more simplified and dumbed down. It is only to be expected because that is just what happens when you want to appeal to a wider audience. Commercially it makes sense. Triple A companties want to make money. It is not about the passion for creating good games anymore. Most people do not have the patience to play a deep, intricate game. They want something that is easy to pick up and play casually. So this version of Civ will try to accomodate that.
The graphics - that are just horrific in my taste - also reflect this. The cartoonish style is what appeals to most and what would also be possible to run on multiple divices. I would not be surprised if this version of Civ will also be touch and tablet freindly. Which also means the UI will have to be simpler as well.
Again, this is probably a lot of speculation. But I wouldn't be surprised at all of this will be the case. Anyway, currently I am not enthusiastic about Civ 6 at all. Fortunatly, I have still have plenty of interest in playing Civ 5 so I'm happy
Please be aware that I base this soly on the screenshots and the little information I read about this. And I also base this on my gut feeling and what I have learned to expect from games and triple A companies in general.
From what I gather from all this, is that this will be a game that will be even more simplified and dumbed down. It is only to be expected because that is just what happens when you want to appeal to a wider audience. Commercially it makes sense. Triple A companties want to make money. It is not about the passion for creating good games anymore. Most people do not have the patience to play a deep, intricate game. They want something that is easy to pick up and play casually. So this version of Civ will try to accomodate that.
The graphics - that are just horrific in my taste - also reflect this. The cartoonish style is what appeals to most and what would also be possible to run on multiple divices. I would not be surprised if this version of Civ will also be touch and tablet freindly. Which also means the UI will have to be simpler as well.
Again, this is probably a lot of speculation. But I wouldn't be surprised at all of this will be the case. Anyway, currently I am not enthusiastic about Civ 6 at all. Fortunatly, I have still have plenty of interest in playing Civ 5 so I'm happy
IIRC it's possible to play CivV on tablet so...
bison21
Warlord
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2012
- Messages
- 221
Sorry for the late response, just been having to read through a lot of these posts. I strongly disagree with this, because stuff like Team Fortress 2 has large polycounts on their models. Smooth curves take a lot compared to even advanced linear detail.
I think a lot of it is perception, and it's not something that I can just hope to make go away. But there is a lot of stigma around non-realistic art styles in video games, and it just depresses me to be honest
No problem.
In general I agree (contrary to popular belief, world of warcraft is no longer playable on toasters- despite their "cartoony" graphics, they have upped the Polycount considerably) and I think part of what makes the style so popular is that it is actually highly polished without having to make-believe of attempted realism.
But I think we have to distinguish between different types of games here. Coincidentally I'm currently playing Cities:Skylines, another game that graphics-wise certainly underwhelms compared to games such as Anno 2205 and when you zoom in you can certainly see why.
So from that perspective I think Firaxis could get away with lower-res trees and props (at least as an option for low graphics settings).
As for the perception- people need something to worry about, and as long as it is just colour saturation rather than fundamental gameplay mechanics, I'm okay with that. I don't think cartoony style is stigmatised at all (can you explain?). Again, look at the huge popularity of Blizzard games.
bison21
Warlord
- Joined
- Nov 21, 2012
- Messages
- 221
It is. Quite frankly if people worry that CiVI will be too mobile friendly, they should look at CiV. The UI overhaul it received is very mobile friendly- although I believe this has less to do with mobiles in particular but rather a general move away from bulky bars of menus covering 50%+ of the screen, since more and more menus are now stored in sub-menus. It's a big reason I find it difficult to revisit older games- TERRIBLE menus!
Link to video.
Battlehelm043
Warlord
I'm pretty sure this will NOT be the type of Civ game most of us are hoping to see.
Please be aware that I base this soly on the screenshots and the little information I read about this. And I also base this on my gut feeling and what I have learned to expect from games and triple A companies in general.
From what I gather from all this, is that this will be a game that will be even more simplified and dumbed down. It is only to be expected because that is just what happens when you want to appeal to a wider audience. Commercially it makes sense. Triple A companties want to make money. It is not about the passion for creating good games anymore. Most people do not have the patience to play a deep, intricate game. They want something that is easy to pick up and play casually. So this version of Civ will try to accomodate that.
The graphics - that are just horrific in my taste - also reflect this. The cartoonish style is what appeals to most and what would also be possible to run on multiple divices. I would not be surprised if this version of Civ will also be touch and tablet freindly. Which also means the UI will have to be simpler as well.
Again, this is probably a lot of speculation. But I wouldn't be surprised at all of this will be the case. Anyway, currently I am not enthusiastic about Civ 6 at all. Fortunatly, I have still have plenty of interest in playing Civ 5 so I'm happy
While I agree with your views of the graphic choice my friend, I am certain that the game will be just as deep and fulfilling as other iterations. The fact is that a simplified UI allows newer players to ease into the systems a little more, I know this was the case for me when I first got into Civ and I do have to give credit; although I dont like too; to Civ Rev for hooking me on the series. That said I always found that game lacking and once I got Civ IV and V I was a little more satisfied. Hopefully Firaxis can prove that the elements they chose to re-use from Civ Rev in Civ VI hold up. Although like you I do feel a smack of pain over their art choice...
Battlehelm043
Warlord
I just hope those of us that have spent the money and resources on solid graphical rigs don't get tossed out into the cold with an art style that requires mid range to base level cards. I mean, I'm sure the poly count will be nice but for those who have high end cards that art style will look childish on max settings which stings a bit. That's just my opinion though, I'm sure the game play will be awesome.
On the side note of Blizzard there is a company that caved to the pressure of pro-gaming and streamlined Starcraft II to be played at fastest speed, which I felt ruined the game pacing. Their art styles shifted to stand more in line with WoW which I always felt was underwhelming. But to each their own; what really has me boggled is the bare bones announcement.
I mean you have Beach describing a break down of the trailer which has "easter eggs" hidden inside of the pictures and symbolism they chose.... I would have preferred some beta game play or screens in the trailer. Yet from what I get the sense of is they want to hold back till E3.
HughFran
Prince
- Joined
- Jul 24, 2015
- Messages
- 348
Well, if you think it looks like it is going backwards just by looking at a few screenshots then fair play to you but I think it is a little early to tell. Going by what I've read on improvements such as stacking, science, districts, etc it seems like a step forward - not backwards. The graphics look fine to me and even if they are a little cartoony (which I don't think they are), that wouldn't be a dealbreaker for me
Acken
Deity
To be honest its mostly the plain textures that suck. Use better textures and colors for those mountains and grassland and it will look a lot better. There is almost no detail on the terrain and its brushed with one color. The models for buildngs and units look good enough to me. By comparison civ5 has better textures with very ugly models.
I hope you are right about this and you might very well be. I am just speculating and saying that from a commercial perspective it isn't really feasible anymore to make games too complex. If you do, you loose the biggest market of gamers: the casuals. They do not have to patience to deal with games that are too intricate. They want something that is easy to pick up and play. And flashy, saturated graphics are also popular among the same crowd.
Similar threads
