Firaxis at Pax East 2014 - Speculations?

It seems like the panel won't be streamed live anywhere, does anyone know someone who will livetweet from the panel?
 
How would you do that though without getting rid of what makes Civilization Civilization?

It's true that to some extent Civilization has always been like a board game. There is a game board, there a are pieces that get moved around, there are other players that take their turns. I have not played Civ5 enough to say whether any of its new mechanics (like the stacking limits) have reinforced that impression. I certainly don't think that board game elements as such are flaws.

What I don't like that much is the attempt to make the player feel like he is playing a board game, like he is sitting around a table playing Settlers of Catan with his pals Napo, Monty and Cathy. I think that this trend started with Civ3 and it strongly reduces the impact of Civilization's attempt to give players a sense of the epic nature of history. That's the game's main appeal to me. That's why I like it better when the game text refers to France or Russia rather than Napoleon or Catherine. That's why I really miss the option to have the civilopedia text pop up with every new advance (Civ1), the use of stock photos in the Civilopedia (Civ2) and the more straightforward use of famous music (Civ4) ... or at least why I would miss these features if I didn't keep going back to the older versions.

Whether Civ6 is announced today or not, I'm pretty sure that the main design choices that define the character and atmosphere of a game have been made by now. I'm curious about whatever they come up with this time around. If it's not my cup of tea, well, that would mean all the more time to keep enjoying the classics.
 
I've always thought one of the strengths of Civ is the extent to which it is somewhat sandbox-y. Sure, you're aiming for a victory at the end of the game, but you can build your empire however you like, setting the game up in whatever way you please. When you raise the difficulty, it becomes more of a board game, but the essence of it is still that you determine the destiny of your empire.
 
Colonization didn't sell that good though iirc.

I think everyone would love an new AC, but I'm afraid any game would fail in comparison to the original (Nostalgia is a powerful thing).

Civ4:Col became a great game only with the AoD2 mod; so I can understand how it did not do well out of the box.

Don't say "everyone would love an new AC". I found the original unplayable and would have absolutely no interest in a reboot. Most of it had to do with my hatred of sci-fi stuff. But despite my bias, I would agree that it would be a niche market, much like Col.
 
But again, many people seem to be forgetting that there can't be an Alpha Centauri 2, due to copyright weirdness. EA will almost certainly not allow Firaxis to use the trademark, and will probably sue the crap out of Firaxis should they try to make a similar game.
 
But again, many people seem to be forgetting that there can't be an Alpha Centauri 2, due to copyright weirdness. EA will almost certainly not allow Firaxis to use the trademark, and will probably sue the crap out of Firaxis should they try to make a similar game.

You can't sue someone for making a 'similar' game, or half the games out there wouldn't exist. Firaxis could make 'Tau Ceti' and be totally safe.
 
But again, many people seem to be forgetting that there can't be an Alpha Centauri 2, due to copyright weirdness. EA will almost certainly not allow Firaxis to use the trademark, and will probably sue the crap out of Firaxis should they try to make a similar game.

Well, in a hypothetical scenario where an AC2 of sorts was made, firstly it could be renamed easily to avoid the first issue. Secondly if it's based off the civ 5 engine i imagine it would be suitably different to avoid a conflict. Considering the direction they've taken civ with the latest two expansions i imagine they could do some interesting new things with alpha centauri.

But then, this is EA we are talking about, and they are the cherubs of hell.
 
Colonization didn't sell that good though iirc.

I think everyone would love an new AC, but I'm afraid any game would fail in comparison to the original (Nostalgia is a powerful thing).

Colonization also didn't cost nearly as much to make as a full fledged Civ game because they can use the same engine, so it balances out a bit in the end. And I really hate how people already say it would "fail" when it hasn't even been announced yet or have heard anything from the hypothetical game. Don't judge it until you have seen it.
 
My money's on a SMAC-ish standalone :mischief:


(right place, right time...)
 
You can't sue someone for making a 'similar' game, or half the games out there wouldn't exist. Firaxis could make 'Tau Ceti' and be totally safe.

But then, this is EA we are talking about, and they are the cherubs of hell.

Ordinarily you'd be right, @Fintilgin, but @True_Candyman has summed up nicely all you need to know about the results of making AC2.
 
http://www.joystiq.com/2014/04/12/civilization-beyond-earth-announced-ready-to-colonize-this-fal/

"Sid Meier's Civilization: Beyond Earth was just announced at developer Firaxis' panel at PAX East. It's not a sequel to Alpha Centauri (those rights are owned by EA), but 2K Games is finally giving fans the spiritual successor to the sci-fi strategy game they've been constantly nagging Firaxis about for over 10 years.

The elephant in the room has been tackled right up front at the PAX East panel happening right now. Firaxis' Will Miller, who is lead designer on the Beyond Earth project, said, "The heart and soul [of Alpha Centauri] lives at Firaxis. For all the fans of Alpha Centauri, this is the game we've made for you.""
 
Top Bottom