Lexicus
Deity
PhilBowles said:
Fair enough. I can dig the rest of what you're saying too even if I don't agree with all of it.
-
Civilization 7 has been announced. For more info please check the forum here .
Initial Reactions
- Thread starter Inspector Javert
- Start date
Fair enough. I can dig the rest of what you're saying too even if I don't agree with all of it.
mitsho
Deity
Initial Reactions?
a) I'm glad they seem to be rebuilding everything from the ground up (they say). A clean start (I hope they mean coding wise and they really mean it) should allow for more logical structure, easier change and thus faster itinerations. (and maybe easier AI perfections through modders)
b) I don't mind the graphical style, as long as it really creates a good UI. If the idea is to make everything crystal clear and easy to use, then that sounds good to me. As I really am not in the mood to sit in front of a screen for several hours, this should be good. I wouldn't even be opposed if they release this as well for "mobile" or tablets, as some fear. "just playing 5 turns" while waiting for the bus may even be appropriate for civ. Otherwise I'll end up just playing the ancient age again...
c) On the other hand, they still seem not to have given up on workers and while putting everything on the map helps overview and playing, it might - along with 1upt - increase micromanagement again. I do hope they think of the casual player a bit, or otherwise I'll just end up leaving a game in the industrial again when I'm just moving stuff around and a turn takes 5 minutes. (Ideally for me, turn time would stay more or less consistent over all eras).
a) I'm glad they seem to be rebuilding everything from the ground up (they say). A clean start (I hope they mean coding wise and they really mean it) should allow for more logical structure, easier change and thus faster itinerations. (and maybe easier AI perfections through modders)
b) I don't mind the graphical style, as long as it really creates a good UI. If the idea is to make everything crystal clear and easy to use, then that sounds good to me. As I really am not in the mood to sit in front of a screen for several hours, this should be good. I wouldn't even be opposed if they release this as well for "mobile" or tablets, as some fear. "just playing 5 turns" while waiting for the bus may even be appropriate for civ. Otherwise I'll end up just playing the ancient age again...
c) On the other hand, they still seem not to have given up on workers and while putting everything on the map helps overview and playing, it might - along with 1upt - increase micromanagement again. I do hope they think of the casual player a bit, or otherwise I'll just end up leaving a game in the industrial again when I'm just moving stuff around and a turn takes 5 minutes. (Ideally for me, turn time would stay more or less consistent over all eras).
keiselhorn13
Chieftain
Initial Reaction:
I know Civ is "not about the graphics", that doesn't mean CivRev graphics are a great choice... I don't like the idea of Civ looking like an app game. As somebody mentioned above, Civ5 graphics were classy, I would prefer if Firaxis followed that pattern.
Very happy they are keeping 1UPT.
That really gave a serious tactic approach to Civ (a la Panzer General), I loved all Civ games so far, but I really don't miss stacks... Each to his own, but IMHO players that can't cope without SOD's are the ones who can't deal with tactical strategy.
I like the idea of districts, and the bigger influence of terrain into research path. I'm always in favour of more historical accuracy in the game as long it doesn't harm strategy and AI behaviour. Yes, it's great to play the "what if" scenarios, but it is silly for Mongols in the centre of the pangea being able to research galleys. I think terrain-favoured research will address that.
I hope they don't hold Civ4 and 5 aspects like religion till future expansion... BTW those hooded guys in screenie 1 (CFC home page) look like monks to me
I know Civ is "not about the graphics", that doesn't mean CivRev graphics are a great choice... I don't like the idea of Civ looking like an app game. As somebody mentioned above, Civ5 graphics were classy, I would prefer if Firaxis followed that pattern.
Very happy they are keeping 1UPT.
That really gave a serious tactic approach to Civ (a la Panzer General), I loved all Civ games so far, but I really don't miss stacks... Each to his own, but IMHO players that can't cope without SOD's are the ones who can't deal with tactical strategy.I like the idea of districts, and the bigger influence of terrain into research path. I'm always in favour of more historical accuracy in the game as long it doesn't harm strategy and AI behaviour. Yes, it's great to play the "what if" scenarios, but it is silly for Mongols in the centre of the pangea being able to research galleys. I think terrain-favoured research will address that.
I hope they don't hold Civ4 and 5 aspects like religion till future expansion... BTW those hooded guys in screenie 1 (CFC home page) look like monks to me
Akka
Moody old mage.
Or maybe player a bit more intelligent than you realize that the world map is not the scale at which "tactics" happen, and that a bad ersatz of Panzer General misplaced in a bad place where archers shoot above mountain range, is inferior to a good abstraction.Very happy they are keeping 1UPT.
Moderator Action: Comparing your intelligence to others on site is flaming. Please state your opinions about the topic at hand and not about other posters. Making it personal is not allowed.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889
keiselhorn13
Chieftain
Civ has never been about map scaling. Otherwise it wouldn't take 10 or 20 years for a cruiser to sail around the world.
Maybe Firaxis should consider pleasing both Civ4 and Civ5 camps by including an option to allow or disallow stacking... maybe that would win back some Civ4 hardcore fans to the series
brianshapiro
King
- Joined
- Mar 6, 2003
- Messages
- 775
Civ has never been about map scaling. Otherwise it wouldn't take 10 or 20 years for a cruiser to sail around the world.
Maybe Firaxis should consider pleasing both Civ4 and Civ5 camps by including an option to allow or disallow stacking... maybe that would win back some Civ4 hardcore fans to the series
I thought 2upt or 3upt was a great middle ground between 1upt and stacks of doom. I'm interested in seeing how combined units actually work as a solution.
I hope they don't hold Civ4 and 5 aspects like religion till future expansion... BTW those hooded guys in screenie 1 (CFC home page) look like monks to me
Good news is that the game launches with almost all the Civ V features:
religion, espionage, trade routes, archeology, tourism and great works..
blackcatatonic
Queen of Meme
I don't think I've posted on Civ Fanatics since CivBE was announced - I had no interest in that game and as I recall promised to crawl under a rock until Civ VI was revealed. So here I am 
It's funny that this announcement actually managed to take me by surprise, as I've been Googling 'civilization 6' on and off for some months now. I still play CiV occasionally but having sunk about 3,000 Steam hours into it since vanilla came out (and with no interest in CivBE) I’ve been really looking forward to the next iteration of the franchise. There’s a long way to go from here to release but honestly, the features I’ve seen so far look awesome, and I’m really excited.
Districts and city sprawling – I really love the idea of customisable city spaces and a movement away from identikit all-producing industrial powerhouses and more towards individual cities specialised for certain aspects of the game. What I’m really hoping for is for the placement of districts to be a meaningful choice: I'd love it, for instance, if the location of fortifications/military districts had an impact on how easily a city could fend off an attack. I’d also like to see some synergy between the different districts: do some districts support each other? Can other districts actually conflict with each other?
Tech progress affected by the map – This feels long overdue: it shouldn’t be as easy for a landlocked Civ to research naval techs as for a Civ with many coastal cities. I think having your Civ’s progression and the shape of your game informed by what the map offers you is a great idea: one thing I didn’t like about CiV was how easy it was to fall into predetermined strategies without even looking at the map. I really like the idea of having my strategy – right down to the Wonders I’ll even be able to build – challenged by the type of map I end up with.
Changes to 1UPT – I know there’s still quite a bit of opposition to 1UPT but it vastly improved combat in the game in my opinion. Unfortunately the AI still doesn’t handle it as well as it could (although it’s come a long way from vanilla). The introduction of support units could help with this while also providing a welcome extra level of complexity to combat. Moving to a limited 2UPT model strikes the right balance, I think.
New art style – like many others here, I don't like it. I think toning down the saturation would go a long way to improving the look of the terrain, and I really hope they consider doing this. That said, I'd much rather a game I didn't like the look of as much as CiV, but one which had brilliant and engaging features, than the opposite combination. My big concern related to this is the leader screen art - that was hands down my favourite feature of CiV, and if they move away from the full-screen, immersive and realistic environments for Civ VI, it'll feel like a massive step backwards. I also really hope they keep the multi-lingual voice acting!
There's a lot of other stuff to be positive about: the retention of CiV's full complement of game systems (religion, espionage, etc. - I'd love a bit more complexity for these two), the new diplomacy system (using espionage to reveal hidden agendas sounds like a great idea), the ethnic/cultural variation of units (I can remember this being a much-desired feature in CiV so it's good to see it's finally happening) and the possibility of a day-night cycle in some form.
Not very much concrete to go on yet, but I'm a pretty optimistic Civ fan at this point
It's funny that this announcement actually managed to take me by surprise, as I've been Googling 'civilization 6' on and off for some months now. I still play CiV occasionally but having sunk about 3,000 Steam hours into it since vanilla came out (and with no interest in CivBE) I’ve been really looking forward to the next iteration of the franchise. There’s a long way to go from here to release but honestly, the features I’ve seen so far look awesome, and I’m really excited.
Districts and city sprawling – I really love the idea of customisable city spaces and a movement away from identikit all-producing industrial powerhouses and more towards individual cities specialised for certain aspects of the game. What I’m really hoping for is for the placement of districts to be a meaningful choice: I'd love it, for instance, if the location of fortifications/military districts had an impact on how easily a city could fend off an attack. I’d also like to see some synergy between the different districts: do some districts support each other? Can other districts actually conflict with each other?
Tech progress affected by the map – This feels long overdue: it shouldn’t be as easy for a landlocked Civ to research naval techs as for a Civ with many coastal cities. I think having your Civ’s progression and the shape of your game informed by what the map offers you is a great idea: one thing I didn’t like about CiV was how easy it was to fall into predetermined strategies without even looking at the map. I really like the idea of having my strategy – right down to the Wonders I’ll even be able to build – challenged by the type of map I end up with.
Changes to 1UPT – I know there’s still quite a bit of opposition to 1UPT but it vastly improved combat in the game in my opinion. Unfortunately the AI still doesn’t handle it as well as it could (although it’s come a long way from vanilla). The introduction of support units could help with this while also providing a welcome extra level of complexity to combat. Moving to a limited 2UPT model strikes the right balance, I think.
New art style – like many others here, I don't like it. I think toning down the saturation would go a long way to improving the look of the terrain, and I really hope they consider doing this. That said, I'd much rather a game I didn't like the look of as much as CiV, but one which had brilliant and engaging features, than the opposite combination. My big concern related to this is the leader screen art - that was hands down my favourite feature of CiV, and if they move away from the full-screen, immersive and realistic environments for Civ VI, it'll feel like a massive step backwards. I also really hope they keep the multi-lingual voice acting!
There's a lot of other stuff to be positive about: the retention of CiV's full complement of game systems (religion, espionage, etc. - I'd love a bit more complexity for these two), the new diplomacy system (using espionage to reveal hidden agendas sounds like a great idea), the ethnic/cultural variation of units (I can remember this being a much-desired feature in CiV so it's good to see it's finally happening) and the possibility of a day-night cycle in some form.
Not very much concrete to go on yet, but I'm a pretty optimistic Civ fan at this point
Westwall
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2014
- Messages
- 1,341
Civ 5 has been one of the most successful installments in the series.
Lexicus
Deity
The problem is not that players can't cope with 1upt, but that the AI can't. 1upt is considerably easier than SOD play.
Akka
Moody old mage.
I think it was obvious I was talking about design, not sales.
keiselhorn13
Chieftain
Westwall
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2014
- Messages
- 1,341
And I'm talking about the number of people playing Civ 5 currently as oppose to Civ 4.
If 4 were truly the superior title, you'd think more people would still be playing it than 5.
That was certainly the case with BE. Players switched to playing it for a while, then went back to 5.
hangman
almost-scientist
Maybe Firaxis should consider pleasing both Civ4 and Civ5 camps by including an option to allow or disallow stacking... maybe that would win back some Civ4 hardcore fans to the series
Wait, how has no one thought of this before? That seems incredibly obvious.
TheMarshmallowBear
Benelovent Chieftain of the Ursu Kingdom
Obvious yes, then find a way to balance it properly.
You change the system and all of a sudden you got two concurring systems that need to be balanced.
The game shifts and now all of a sudden you got even more things to balance.
It's not that simple. You stack those units and then the entire game environment dynamic shifts to something that needs to be balanced.
As much as I see what you are saying I unfortunately need to point out that Civ 4 came before Steam was a thing, so our data is kinda messed up.
Lexicus
Deity
Well, I'm not sure you would - more people voted for George W Bush the second time around, and he wasn't the better candidate.
But in any case, the truth is you have no basis whatever for making this statement (more people play V than IV) because while IV is on Steam now it didn't start out that way and most of the people who play IV probably don't play it on Steam.
poom3619
Ping Pang Poom!
Agree, I would even say it will become two different turn-based strategy games that happen to share it's name, psuedo-historical setting and graphic asset
.
Since time immemorial, people here cite a number of estimated sales to voice their opinion. There are probably a few set of those number in every subforum from Civ2 to CivBE already.
In reality of gaming, there are no universally liked game, and developer and published can't actually get paid by hype. The game that make a solid fanbase and sell many copies is a great game, and there would still be some flaw and critics anyway.
Westwall
Emperor
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2014
- Messages
- 1,341
Neither of these make a case for Civ 5 being "terrible" or "poorly designed."
hangman
almost-scientist
Yep, so balance both of them. Time consuming? Yes, but you quash the biggest disagreement in taste between Civ4 and Civ5 fans. That's got to pay off somehow.
You do realise that "something taking time" is the biggest reason features never make it into games, right? Time is not a luxury any developer tends to have.
The only exceptions being Valve who barely make games anymore (and I've heard some Fun Things on how awkward their backend tech is to use, as a developer) and Blizzard who have the funding to sit on projects for nine years before releasing them.
Similar threads
