AI or 3D Engine

[warpstorm]

No, eg577, what this poll says is that 68 out of 83 of the most hard-core Civ Fanatics would rather have AI than graphics. I'd be very leary about extending the findings of this poll to the Civ buying consumers as a whole. If you are reading this at all you are not representative of the million or so buyers of Civ3. Most of them are not fanatics. Most of them have trouble beating Warlord. I've got quite a few friends who are casual Civ players who have never beaten Regent.

FWIW, I am one of those 68.

 

[Jon Shafer]

Agreed with WS, as we always seem to do... Wonder why that is.

The average PC (TM) is good enough to run pretty much any 3D game out there. And by the time CIV is released, the average PC (TM) will have gotten even better. I really don't think we're going to be talking DOOM III material here after all - the 3D isn't the focus of the game, after all.

And eg577, I think it's unfair to assume that Firaxis doesn't think that a better AI is important. Listing "an improved AI over Civ 3!" as an important new feature for the future of the series would be both redundant with the obvious as well as, well... unspactacular. They're obviously not going to regress any, and since computers are getting better, I think it's safe to assume that it will be better.

Need I repeat the story about how Civ 3's programming team left after a year of work was done and Firaxis had to hire a whole new cadre to take over and save the project. It's a miracle the thing even loaded, let alone played well. With CIV being made from scratch with a complete team from start to finish (we hope ), I have no doubts that the AI, as well as everything else, will be an improvement over Civ 3.

 

[masterofdragons]

You guys worry too much. If Sid is involved, not only will the graphics be improved and in 3D, but the AI will most certainly change significantly. Have we been disappointed from CIV I to II to III to Conquests? (ok, there was PTW, but that was production fault, not design) But, I can guarantee with certainty that AI will be better and also much different from what we currently see. Why, you say? Why bother with Civ 4 if things aren't going to change - just release another expansion pack. No, I am optimistic, this new Civ will blow our freakin MINDS!!!

 

[sir_schwick]

The average PC (TM) is good enough to run pretty much any 3D game out there. And by the time CIV is released, the average PC (TM) will have gotten even better. I really don't think we're going to be talking DOOM III material here after all - the 3D isn't the focus of the game, after all.

That would be true of the average PC made in the last 18 months. Many people own the same PC for three or more years. My current PC is four years old and will likely not be replaced for a year or two. In my opinion too good of a graphics engine will alienate many people who don't replace their computer every two years.

On graphics, sometimes slightly aged graphics are a good thing. Look at the Total War series. When each game came out, the engine worked very well for what it did, but computer graphics looked better at the time. Why the worse graphics? The combat engine required that many system resources because it truly simulated man to man combat. Even Rome: Total War, which has much nicer graphics then MTW, is slightly behind the curve. I won't care though, because I know the programmers and publishers care more about gameplay then graphics.

What was the point of the diatribe? I was just presenting the viewpoint that you may alienate long-time Civers who feel the series has sold out.

 

[warpstorm]

They are using the Gamebryo engine. If you can run Freedom Force on your computer, I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to run Civ4 when it comes out.

 

[dh_epic]

I don't think the 3D load will affect performance that much for anyone who has even a marginal 3D graphics card. The idea is that Civ 3 put all the graphics load on your processor, whereas Civ 4 will put the graphics load where it belongs, on the graphics processor. Kind of how Longhorn will make for a more efficient version of Windows.

 

[sir_schwick]

They are using the Gamebryo engine. If you can run Freedom Force on your computer, I see no reason why you shouldn't be able to run Civ4 when it comes out.

Well, I do own Free Force and play it some, so I should be cool. Thank you warpstorm.

 

[masterofdragons]

Yes, and Longhorns make good steaks too

 

[Vizurok]

Simple answer: Better AI
But 3D graphics are cool...

 

[tehfreak]

3D generally isn't better looking than 2D. You always end up with polygons and putting settings to LOW because you feel that 1000times better graphics don't worth the 1second lag you get here and then.

In terms of fun and gameplay, lag will always be a pain, and 3D always brings lag.
Just look at Warcraft3, it is pretty horrible, even though at first look you would think it is great.

 

[BlueNine]

AI all the way, I want to have to defend a solid, full-on amphibious landing at least ONCE. I, like many others, don't particularly want to see my Armies from every angle, especially if being able to do so means that I have to wait through lag so it can load parts that I will rarely see. I also find fully customisable cameras incredibly annoying.

I would be happy enough if Civ4 was just Civ3 with some new features and a good AI but the best I can hope for now is that they make a good job of whatever 3D graphics they do implement, so as to not ruin what Civilization has always been about...the gameplay.

 

[sealman]

AI all the way, I want to have to defend a solid, full-on amphibious landing at least ONCE. I, like many others, don't particularly want to see my Armies from every angle, especially if being able to do so means that I have to wait through lag so it can load parts that I will rarely see. I also find fully customisable cameras incredibly annoying.

I would be happy enough if Civ4 was just Civ3 with some new features and a good AI but the best I can hope for now is that they make a good job of whatever 3D graphics they do implement, so as to not ruin what Civilization has always been about...the gameplay.

I agree with you but have one question...

regarding your signature - what is the other rule?

 

[warpstorm]

I would be happy enough if Civ4 was just Civ3 with some new features

Soren has said that Civ4 will be a totally new game that is based on the Civ series. It will not be Civ3+. Those who are wanting that may be disappointed.

 

[BlueNine]

Soren has said that Civ4 will be a totally new game that is based on the Civ series. It will not be Civ3+. Those who are wanting that may be disappointed.

Hmm, then again in hindsight I thought similiarly about Civ2 and yet was pleasently surprised with Civ3. I just HOPE they don't sacrifice gameplay for graphics.

I agree with you but have one question...
regarding your signature - what is the other rule?

...You're joking right?

 

[warpstorm]

I just HOPE they don't sacrifice gameplay for graphics.

Don't we all? Don't we all?

I think that if they forget about the gameplay that will be the end of the series. (But I'm not against better graphics).

 

[sir_schwick]

Hmm, then again in hindsight I thought similiarly about Civ2 and yet was pleasently surprised with Civ3. I just HOPE they don't sacrifice gameplay for graphics.



...You're joking right?

I think the joke is on sealman, BlueNine.

 

[Dida]

As far as the graphic goes, I don't even care if civ4 looks exactly the same as civ3, which is good looking as it is. But I do expect a lot of new features, and better AI and new rules.

 

[crimson238]

I am saddened by the 3d. I actually probably will not buy civ 4. I have ever civ game from civ 1 up (less conquests which the g/f is buying for my on my birthday.) But i will not buy civ 4 simply because I get annoyed as is with the 10-15 minute turn intervals I have now on large maps. I can only imagine what it will be like if made 3d. I just got htis computer, i edit film on this computer, i know i can handle 3d, but i'd rather not.
I want more AI. I wantto be surprised by the computer sometime. I want a computer Ai that can learn my tactic and adjust to them. one that can remember what i did the last turn and then react to it.
And also, i wasn't impressed nor did i like the pirates screenshot.

 

[troytheface]

reading this thread i am not surprised that many are reluctant to change. human nature. (which is probably why empires fall...) Personally i would not care if they reworked the whole thing- progress will not be swayed by a couple hundred stick in the muds.

 

[Jon Shafer]

I am saddened by the 3d. I actually probably will not buy civ 4. I have ever civ game from civ 1 up (less conquests which the g/f is buying for my on my birthday.) But i will not buy civ 4 simply because I get annoyed as is with the 10-15 minute turn intervals I have now on large maps. I can only imagine what it will be like if made 3d. I just got htis computer, i edit film on this computer, i know i can handle 3d, but i'd rather not.
I want more AI. I wantto be surprised by the computer sometime. I want a computer Ai that can learn my tactic and adjust to them. one that can remember what i did the last turn and then react to it.
And also, i wasn't impressed nor did i like the pirates screenshot.

So you think automatically that just because Firaxis goes 3D means that they care less about the AI or gameplay?

I don't think that's a fair assumption, especially with the game a year and a half away and hardly a peep even been revealed about it.

Read the reviews, play the demo, borrow the game from a friend, whatever. If you don't like it then, then fair enough. But I don't think it's proper to pass a final judgement on a product which no one has even used yet.