Animations

Beloyar · May 23, 2004

Civ 4 needs better animations! :hammer:

This is not to say that the current animations are bad. They are good. The new ones could be optional, depending on available system resources.

● Infantry fighting a tank should throw grenades, instead of firing rifles/machine guns.
● Tanks should turn the turret to attack bypassing enemy units when in zone of control mode.
● When a plane is shot down, it should leave a trail of black smoke and smash into the ground/water, leaving a small burning wreck with smoke going up to the sky.
● Destroyed tanks could also appear as burning wrecks for a while.

I'll come up with more later.

Pounder · May 23, 2004

Yes they should make use of multiple attack animations.

Beloyar · May 23, 2004

How could I forget.

When a city is bombarded and you see an explosion over it, there should also be a fire and smoke coming out of the city afterwards, if some improvement was destroyed.

ComradeDavo · May 23, 2004

I'm not too bothered about animations, as long as their to a decent standard.

It's all about the gameplay for me

ShADoW^HawK · May 23, 2004

Yeah. Gameplay is much more important. If they have graphics like Civ (original), but the game is still so full of content, I'll love it! Of course, what you're saying would add to the visual appeal, and is an obvious marketing strategy for first-timers.

Beloyar · May 24, 2004

I hope you're not referring to me as a "first-timer", 'cause that would be stupid. Animation and graphics is one of the most important components of any VIDEO game, no less important than the gameplay. That is why they call them VIDEO games, made especially for those who have eyes and pleasure senses. Actually it's the graphics that often improves the game, after everything else has been tried and played. :cooool:

We also have taste buds. That is why we often choose tasty foods over the ones with nutritional value.

ShADoW^HawK said:
Yeah. Gameplay is much more important. If they have graphics like Civ (original), but the game is still so full of content, I'll love it! Of course, what you're saying would add to the visual appeal, and is an obvious marketing strategy for first-timers.

And after all, you're not suggesting anything to improve, you're just reacting negatively to a good suggestion. ● ● ● :wavey:

P.S. I like your sig :goodjob:

The Last Conformist · May 24, 2004

Beloyar said:
I hope you're not referring to me as a "first-timer", 'cause that would be stupid. Animation and graphics is one of the most important components of any VIDEO game, no less important than the gameplay. That is why they call them VIDEO games, made especially for those who have eyes and pleasure senses. Actually it's the graphics that often improves the game, after everything else has been tried and played.

Well, the amount of importance we accord to graphics is subject to personal variation. In PTW, I usually switched of combat animations (can't do it in C3C, since an "improvement" means I don't get to follow combats at all then), and I regularly shift away movement anims.

(Oh, and don't call Civ a "video game"

)

I think tank wrecks all over the place would get real old real fast.

warpstorm · May 24, 2004

I like cool graphics, but given a choice between cooler graphics and better gameplay, give me gameplay any day. Graphics may get me to try a game (I'm shallow like that) but it won't keep me playing it a few weeks later.

DogmaDog · May 24, 2004

The animations you're talking about are cool, but they really need to keep them short--at later stages of the game when you have hundreds of units to move around, all the time adds up--I usually turn off most of the animations at that point, just to save time!

DD

Beloyar · May 25, 2004

The Last Conformist said:
Well, the amount of importance we accord to graphics is subject to personal variation. In PTW, I usually switched of combat animations (can't do it in C3C, since an "improvement" means I don't get to follow combats at all then), and I regularly shift away movement anims.

(Oh, and don't call Civ a "video game" )

I think tank wrecks all over the place would get real old real fast.

So, besides the tank wrecks, I take it you like the other suggestions?
I agree, I am already tired of city ruins all over the map. However, tank wrecks could disappear in one or two turns, gradually, or when another unit moves into the tile.
I am not really suggesting that much anyway. There is already a fire-and-smoke animation for cities in anarchy. Just take that and stick it on a tile where a plane went down.

Oh, and I hope you're not trying to call me a liar for calling Civ 3 a video game. We know it's not a board game.

Turner · May 25, 2004

I think he was suggesting that Civ3 is more than just a video game....at least, that's how I took it.

Given what little I know about how animations work in Civ3, I don't think it would be that hard to implement something like this along those lines. ZoC is just another unit animation, and the Jet falling out of the sky trailing smoke is just a longer death animation. With the current system, however, I'm not sure you could do a long falling death....but then I don't do animations, so perhaps one could.

Beloyar · May 25, 2004

DogmaDog said:
The animations you're talking about are cool, but they really need to keep them short--at later stages of the game when you have hundreds of units to move around, all the time adds up--I usually turn off most of the animations at that point, just to save time!
DD

Thanks, but the problem with saving time is in the system requirements of a computer and in game size. Animations and graphics are not supposed to slow the game and waste your time, but create a more exciting visual environment. Developers should provide smooth operation for all things in the game.
What you and warpstorm are suggesting is a war-room environment kind of game, where you look at a map on a table and move around little chips that represent different units at your disposal. You get faxes with updates about the result of battles. You increase or decrease the number of chips, and so on. Everything happens in your head.
I am sorry that some people are less interested in visual arts. But if gameplay is everything, and animations/graphics are optional, then we might as well just play with our eyes closed.

Turner · May 25, 2004

Beloyar said:
I am sorry that some people are less interested in visual arts. But if gameplay is everything, and animations/graphics are optional, then we might as well just play with our eyes closed.

Then how would we know what happened? :crazyeye:

The point they're trying to make is that a game is not made on animations alone. You could have the best animations ever made, but if the game play sucked, who would play it? I wouldn't. A lot of people I know wouldn't. But a game with graphics that aren't as up to spec, but still have engaging game play, is much more enjoyable, IMHO.

Beloyar · May 25, 2004

Turner_727 said:
I think he was suggesting that Civ3 is more than just a video game....at least, that's how I took it.

Given what little I know about how animations work in Civ3, I don't think it would be that hard to implement something like this along those lines. ZoC is just another unit animation, and the Jet falling out of the sky trailing smoke is just a longer death animation. With the current system, however, I'm not sure you could do a long falling death....but then I don't do animations, so perhaps one could.

Ok, such animations as fireworks appearing over celebrating cities, workers doing their thing, bored foot units stretching, and smoking cities in anarchy - those are all continuous animations - they go on as you play, without pausing the game. Same thing can be done with falling planes and the smoke trail. The death animation could continue on its own while you launch the next bomber.

Beloyar · May 25, 2004

Turner_727 said:
Then how would we know what happened?

The point they're trying to make is that a game is not made on animations alone. You could have the best animations ever made, but if the game play sucked, who would play it? I wouldn't. A lot of people I know wouldn't. But a game with graphics that aren't as up to spec, but still have engaging game play, is much more enjoyable, IMHO.

Since the forum is about ideas and suggestions for Civ 4, my point is to have some new animations in the game. I don't know why some people stubbornly oppose this, and at the same time insist that gameplay (or other thing) is more important. If that was the case, we would be discussing nothing but gameplay.

I never said animations are more important. They are important in my view. But most of all, they would be a great improvement in a new game. Civ 3 came out with animations that Civ 2 didn't have, and everybody liked that :goodjob:

.

I would be careful with people who ridicule others' suggestions only because they consider something else to be more important. That's very selfish

. It's not like Firaxis told us they can either put new animations in or better gameplay, but not both. Better yet, imagine if we were told that Civ 4 would have sucky gameplay.

They never said that, so I don't understand why some people have these fears. If someone is not satisfied with Civ 3 gameplay, I am sure there is a thread that discusses gameplay improvements for Civ 4. I don't go there to ridicule people's suggestions, so why do some people go here and try to diminish the value of animations/graphics? :confused:

DogmaDog · May 25, 2004

OK, I like the idea of cooler, more detailed animations. But I also dislike sitting there waiting for all the AI moves to take place, or waiting to press "B" for the next artillery in my stack of 30 to shell the enemy capitol...it all takes time, and gets tedious.

A good compromise would be to have the option to aminate just SOME of the battles. Most of them would go really fast and not show much, while 1 in 5 or 1 in 10 would have a nice, detailed animation. Or maybe battles that are really close (both units get redlined), or battles where leaders are born would get the longer, more detailed animations.

DD

warpstorm · May 25, 2004

Beloyar said:
I am sorry that some people are less interested in visual arts.

Wow, he lumped me in this category. I guess he doesn't know me very well.

I like graphics and animation, I buy games just because of the cool graphics. I replace the graphics in games that are good, but I don't like the graphics *cough*Civ3*cough*.

I won't keep playing a game if the main point of it is the "cool graphics". After I've seen them, where's the draw? If engaging game play is secondary to graphics, I likely won't buy the sequels to the game.

Commander Bello · May 25, 2004

Beloyar said:
[...]It's not like Firaxis told us they can either put new animations in or better gameplay, but not both. Better yet, imagine if we were told that Civ 4 would have sucky gameplay.

They never said that, so I don't understand why some people have these fears. If someone is not satisfied with Civ 3 gameplay, I am sure there is a thread that discusses gameplay improvements for Civ 4. I don't go there to ridicule people's suggestions, so why do some people go here and try to diminish the value of animations/graphics?

In principle, they did say this.
The reason for missing city view at the scenarios of C3C and missing new wonder views there was mentioned by persons of Firaxis to be a limited budget.
Additionally, I think that at least some players don't regard C3C to have been a quantum leap. It has brought some improvements (and some things, almost nobody understands) but to be honest, it wasn't just a milestone in the history of computer games. Not to be misunderstood: I am playing it.

Nevertheless, I think a lot of people fear that too much attention could go to graphics and too less to the desired improvement of gameplay.
That is, why people say: I prefer gameplay improvement over graphics improvement.
They just don't disqualify your suggestions. But they regard some other things as being even more important.

Ballazic · May 25, 2004

Graphics can improve but as they do it will be harder to make mods.

Mewtarthio · May 25, 2004

Beloyar said:
I hope you're not referring to me as a "first-timer", 'cause that would be stupid. Animation and graphics is one of the most important components of any VIDEO game, no less important than the gameplay. That is why they call them VIDEO games, made especially for those who have eyes and pleasure senses. Actually it's the graphics that often improves the game, after everything else has been tried and played.

We also have taste buds. That is why we often choose tasty foods over the ones with nutritional value.

Don't you still like to play those old video games with their cartoonish graphics? I still consider platformers to be one of the best genres of video games, yet there aren't many graphically-focused platformers out there.

Animations

Demigod

Phaethon was here

Demigod

Formerly God

The Shanksta Ganksta

Demigod

Irresistibly Attractive

Yumbo? Yumbo!

Chieftain

Demigod

Deity

Demigod

Deity

Demigod

Demigod

Chieftain

Yumbo? Yumbo!

Say No 2 Net Validations

King

Emperor

Similar threads