A Possible Future for the Civ series...

[SJSerio]

With the pending release of Civ V: Gods & Kings, I have to say that I am growing more intrigued by the Religion through customization method. It has got me thinking about possible changes to the series overall. While the core game can remain as is (well, with some modifications... ie, I personally prefer limited stacks over 1UPT... but that debate is another topic altogether... and one that has, perhaps, been done to death).

Anyway, what if they did away with Civilizations as we know it and allowed us to customize the civs from the get go. They could probably do away with leaders as the player is portraying that role anyway. As far as the civilizations, they could still include the civ names as part of a selection (AI civs would select from the list randomly), but the player can also select fictitious names or name it themselves. Unique Abilities can be selected at certain points of the game as you develop your civ. Distinctions (like artstyle, flavor) can also be made depending on where your civ is located and the nearby civs. In other words, civs that start in or near a desert may take on a more middle eastern look, while civs that start in the poles may take on a more european look. Other factors could effect it as well.

Unique Units and Buildings, etc) could be aquired by certain abilities in context to your civ. If you have a lot of horse units available, for example, you could be able to select Unique Horse unit.

Anyway, just a few ideas I thought might be able to be expounded on by the community. Perhaps it could be worked on by an experienced modder, or taken into consideration by the developers for the next iteration. What do you all think?

 

[PhilBowles]

With the pending release of Civ V: Gods & Kings, I have to say that I am growing more intrigued by the Religion through customization method. It has got me thinking about possible changes to the series overall. While the core game can remain as is (well, with some modifications... ie, I personally prefer limited stacks over 1UPT... but that debate is another topic altogether... and one that has, perhaps, been done to death).

Anyway, what if they did away with Civilizations as we know it and allowed us to customize the civs from the get go. They could probably do away with leaders as the player is portraying that role anyway.

A strong "no" from me (but then, the customised religions are the one part of G&K from what I've so far seen that I actively dislike). The Civ games rise and fall on the flavour of their civs - Civ III/IV's set of premade mix-n-match leaders were a move in this direction, and were desperately lacking in character (I don't mean in game as diplomatic personalities, I mean in Civ selection and envisioning yourself as actually playing as Pericles or Suryavarman rather than as the one who gets quick libraries and universities, or the expansive/creative one).

 

[awesome]

it sounds fun that the player can choose everything, but it would end up just being overpowered, especially if the ai just picks stuff randomly. i can go along with maybe one or two things being customizable like that, but not everything. the game can, for example, at least figure out that a lot of its cities are near deserts so it should probably try getting extra faith from that tile, but i don't know if i'd put it much past that.
another suggestion that comes up just as often as this one is the customizable unique units based on what you build the most. that might work.

 

[Kaosprophet]

Anyway, what if they did away with Civilizations as we know it and allowed us to customize the civs from the get go. They could probably do away with leaders as the player is portraying that role anyway. As far as the civilizations, they could still include the civ names as part of a selection (AI civs would select from the list randomly), but the player can also select fictitious names or name it themselves.

You can already rename the civ if you want.

 

[SJSerio]

it sounds fun that the player can choose everything, but it would end up just being overpowered, especially if the ai just picks stuff randomly. i can go along with maybe one or two things being customizable like that, but not everything. the game can, for example, at least figure out that a lot of its cities are near deserts so it should probably try getting extra faith from that tile, but i don't know if i'd put it much past that.
another suggestion that comes up just as often as this one is the customizable unique units based on what you build the most. that might work.

That is why I would say it should be context sensitive and limited. Once an ability is picked, another cannot pick it. Of course, their would have to be some tuning, but I am just laying the foundation.

You can already rename the civ if you want.

Yes, you can already rename the civ... but it does little good if all of the other civs are real civs and yours is unique. It takes away from the illusion. The only way you can rename all is if you make a mod and that, itself, is too restrictive for what I am talking about.

 

[Naokaukodem]

I like your idea very much, especially the bit "choose your civ from a vast list".

This list would have all existing countries of nowdays, and also all past known countries.

This, would interest me a lot. As I said in another topic, trying to analyse what makes the fun of Civ, and particularly for myself, lead me to consider the importance of roleplaying.

In Civ3 to 5, leaders have too much personnality. I'm from France, but when I choose "Napoleon", well, that's Napoleon, not France. In the same vein, when I pick a civilization with particular traits, I tend, of course, to be carefull of those traits. Hence, my choice goes according to those traits, not the nation anymore. And that's what leads to a lack of roleplay. (i rarely played France in 3/4/5)

Your following ideas would be very good in order to let the trait fans have what they want and let the others roleplay on their convenience.

Plus, it would make your civilization really unique throughout the game, and one would not have this impression to play the exact same civilization with exact same traits (or absence of them) only labelled differently. (for those who lack imagination / are too old, provided there's an age for national pride)

 

[spider1]

it sounds fun that the player can choose everything, but it would end up just being overpowered, especially if the ai just picks stuff randomly. i can go along with maybe one or two things being customizable like that, but not everything. the game can, for example, at least figure out that a lot of its cities are near deserts so it should probably try getting extra faith from that tile, but i don't know if i'd put it much past that.
another suggestion that comes up just as often as this one is the customizable unique units based on what you build the most. that might work.

the original Empire Earth had a set up like that, which was a lot of fun. I still play the game. You get 100 "points" to select from a whole list of attributes for your custom civ, and those 100 points don't go that far in a very long list of things you can select. For instance, I have fast workers throughout the game and unreal tanks for the later age. But, my infantry and other things are ordinary. That concept could also work in Civ, but I doubt they would do this. It's a very major break from tradition, even more so that Civ V is from IV.

 

[alexanderbryan]

i think there should be a couple more Dlc's but nothing big

 

[ShadowWarrior]

the original Empire Earth had a set up like that, which was a lot of fun. I still play the game. You get 100 "points" to select from a whole list of attributes for your custom civ, and those 100 points don't go that far in a very long list of things you can select. For instance, I have fast workers throughout the game and unreal tanks for the later age. But, my infantry and other things are ordinary. That concept could also work in Civ, but I doubt they would do this. It's a very major break from tradition, even more so that Civ V is from IV.

I would love to see that implemented, but yeah, its prolly not going to happen.

 

[gps]

They could probably do away with leaders as the player is portraying that role anyway.

From my point of view this would be the worst idea they could have. Just have a look at all the discussions here, where leaders are given nicknames and their character and behaviour - within the limits of an AI programming - are discussed intensly and quite emotionally. Some of those guys are loved, some others hated. Some you can trust, some you can trick and some try to trick you. Dropping the leaders would rob the game of a lot of its "character" and "personality". Bad move! I would not be very much interested in a game where I had to make diplomacy with or fight faceless, random entities...

 

[gunnergoz]

While I like the idea of customizing my own civ to suit my mood, I'm not much in favor of the AI generating random civs and leaders. As it is, the AI is apparently very difficult to program effectively. Let the developers find ways to tweak the AI as much as possible, which I suspect means leaving much of the civ paradigm as-is. But we could and should have more customizing readily available for the player...at least in solo games. I could see how too much customizing would play he// with multiplayer, but I never play that way and probably never will.