An Intresting Discovery (new for me atleast)

[TheMarshmallowBear]

I was just looking through the XML files in Civ 5 folder, mostly to look if it's possible to add Scientific/Production/etc Traits for City States, when I stumbled upon something very peculiar indeed.

<Table name="Votes">
        <Column name="ID" type="integer" primarykey="true" autoincrement="true" />
        <Column name="Type" type="text" notnull="true" unique="true" />
        <Column name="Description" type="text" />
        <Column name="PopulationThreshold" type="integer" default="0" />
        <Column name="MinVoters" type="integer" default="0" />
        <Column name="CityVoting" type="boolean" default="false" />
        <Column name="CivVoting" type="boolean" default="false" />
        <Column name="SecretaryGeneral" type="boolean" default="false" />
        <Column name="Victory" type="boolean" default="false" />
        <Column name="FreeTrade" type="boolean" default="false" />
        <Column name="NoNukes" type="boolean" default="false" />
        <Column name="DefensivePact" type="boolean" default="false" />
        <Column name="OpenBorders" type="boolean" default="false" />
        <Column name="ForcePeace" type="boolean" default="false" />
        <Column name="ForceNoTrade" type="boolean" default="false" />
        <Column name="ForceWar" type="boolean" default="false" />
        <Column name="AssignCity" type="boolean" default="false" />
    </Table>

So is this from Civ IV? Because I also found "Civ5VoteSource" and "Apostolic Palace" inside it? Why on earth would they have kept this in? Is this a planned feature? or just some residue?

I'll be honest I'm quite annoyed that they removed A.P and U.N voting stuff? Has anyone tried to make this work?

 

[Dreadnought]

What is this exactly?

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

It's type of voting in U.N/Apostolic Palace located in GameInfo in Civ 5's XML files. I'm wondering Why are they there?

 

[vincentz]

They left a bunch of stuff from Civ 4 (lazy bastards).

This looks very civ4 to me.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

It probably is, because Apostolic Palace is somewhere in the files too.. That is if you believe me, if you don't check it out yourself.

Now I'm wondering if it's possible to "turn them on"

 

[gladoscc]

It probably is, because Apostolic Palace is somewhere in the files too.. That is if you believe me, if you don't check it out yourself.

Now I'm wondering if it's possible to "turn them on"

Or use some mods.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

Well, it's the same thing, though I presume they might be very broken anyways, since I'd presume making them work would require DLL tampering.

 

[lschnarch]

Shafer himself once admitted:

For anyone digging throught the XML files: there's actually a number of fields from Civ 4 which we never cleaned up, and some of them misrepresent what effects there are on various difficulty levels - so don't take all of those numbers as gospel. T

The important part is that the xml files may contain elements which are not only not used (bad enough) but that they just copied xml files from Civ4 (kind regards to anybody who complains about comparisons with that game, btw).

Why would one do this when creating a new game "from the scratch"?

Right, just because of not being able to create a new game.

 

[joasoze]

An expansion pack for CIV IV would make me much more happy than this half baked CIV V...

 

[Guardian_PL]

An expansion pack for CIV IV would make me much more happy than this half baked CIV V...

Hear, hear!

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

If Civ IV would have 1 upt/combat system (sieging cities and surrounding it rather than just moving into it if empty) and hexagonal tiles, i'd be playing it over Civ V.

 

[DavidCAD]

So far as I understand it Civ5 began development using the Civ4 engine to playtest many of the planned game mechanics while the Civ5 engine was still in development. Once the Civ5 engine and game art where far enough along this Civ4 and half rulebook (the xml files) where ported over, mostly likely with a simple script to take into account any changes. From this point any new types of rules that where not possible in the Civ4 engine could start to be added. I believe in the developer interview that this transition between using the Civ4 engine and the Civ5 engine was blamed for the external testers being left in the dark for several weeks, because management was not willing to release it to non-employees until the copy protection was complete.

This is nothing new, most competent game studios reuse their existing code when making a sequal or similar game - unlike Civ4 and Civ5 the engine is usually kept too, just improved. I can remember way back finding that Red Alert (an early Westwood RTS game set in an alternate WWII) actually contained several unit graphics for Command & Conquer, since it reused the same game engine and the same resource files as a starting point for development. Any unit that wasn't replaced with a WWII unit was just locked out.

 

[TheMarshmallowBear]

True, but RA and CnC were on the same engine, so I can understand that.

Well, I'm not "angry" I'm just curious if it's possible to turn the U.N voting back on because it would add SO much flavour in my opinion to games (atleast to mine, now that I can play full games without worrying of getting conquered)