Maybe there is an option to turn them from animated 3d leaders to 2d portraits. Both civ V and VI had an option like that to make it run better on weaker machines. iirc it was a standstill of the 3d leader though... the worst of both world maybe?
I was mostly referring to how Civ5 models moved like animatronics. But I agree that Civ7's leaders look worse than Civ5's, even though Civ5's did not look great.
There are also men who look like women and vice versa. That fact is irrelevant to what we're talking about. This is not a snapshot of someone walking by in the street; somebody deliberately chose to make Augustus look this way. The reason for it is not clear, but art decisions are not accidental.
I'm holding out hope that we just got the worst leaders upfront, that all of the rest revealed are pretty solid choices, and that I can just turn off Augustus, Napoleon, and Franklin for every game I play.
I think the underlying question we’re not asking is why the leaders don’t have the same sense of fidelity that they had in the pre-fixed leader screens. Could it be that Augustus’s armor squashes and stretches because they built a system such that we’d be able to replace what he’s wearing after progressing down the Leader Meta Progression system? Is it a time saving measure on the backend so they can pump out more personas for each leader? “The artists are aren’t as good” doesn’t seem like a reason that holds a lot of water when you consider the years of institutional knowledge the art team would have accrued over the years of supporting working on Civ VI.
There are also men who look like women and vice versa. That fact is irrelevant to what we're talking about. This is not a snapshot of someone walking by in the street; somebody deliberately chose to make Augustus look this way. The reason for it is not clear, but art decisions are not accidental.
There are also men who look like women and vice versa. That fact is irrelevant to what we're talking about. This is not a snapshot of someone walking by in the street; somebody deliberately chose to make Augustus look this way. The reason for it is not clear, but art decisions are not accidental.
I think the underlying question we’re not asking is why the leaders don’t have the same sense of fidelity that they had in the pre-fixed leader screens. Could it be that Augustus’s armor squashes and stretches because they built a system such that we’d be able to replace what he’s wearing after progressing down the Leader Meta Progression system? Is it a time saving measure on the backend so they can pump out more personas for each leader? “The artists are aren’t as good” doesn’t seem like a reason that holds a lot of water when you consider the years of institutional knowledge the art team would have accrued over the years of supporting working on Civ VI.
This is a rather generous presumption at this point. The leaders in VI had quite elaborate costumes that moved realistically, and the devs were totally capable of giving them full dress changes. Plus, I would think it to be industry (or at least Civ's own) standard by now after 2 games with better modeling. This is giving them a lot of benefit of the doubt that they couldn't model alternate personas with better clothing, time-saving or not.
Furthermore, I don't want quickly churned out alternate personae, not in a game that has finally opened up space for a bunch of unique leaders that don't need civs. One would think they would be using the freed up resources to make each leader as distinct and high-quality as possible now that they don't need to make 40-50 of them on release.
This is a rather generous presumption at this point. The leaders in VI had quite elaborate costumes that moved realistically, and the devs were totally capable of giving them full dress changes. Plus, I would think it to be industry (or at least Civ's own) standard by now after 2 games with better modeling. This is giving them a lot of benefit of the doubt that they couldn't model alternate personas with better clothing, time-saving or not.
Furthermore, I don't want quickly churned out alternate personae, not in a game that has finally opened up space for a bunch of unique leaders that don't need civs. One would think they would be using the freed up resources to make each leader as distinct and high-quality as possible now that they don't need to make 40-50 of them on release.
This is my thinking as well. Civ5's leaders looked good for their time and even now are beautifully lit, even if the models haven't held up. Civ6's leaders aren't just vibrant in their animations; they're extremely detailed. Civ7's leaders have been a disappointment on all of those fronts--bad lighting, lacking detail, lots of clipping and wonky movement. Clipping and wonky movement I would think would be fixed in an art pass and detail does seem to be still in the process of being added, but I don't think any amount of art passes would bring these models up to Civ6's standards--and that's a shame.
This is my thinking as well. Civ5's leaders looked good for their time and even now are beautifully lit, even if the models haven't held up. Civ6's leaders aren't just vibrant in their animations; they're extremely detailed. Civ7's leaders have been a disappointment on all of those fronts--bad lighting, lacking detail, lots of clipping and wonky movement. Clipping and wonky movement I would think would be fixed in an art pass and detail does seem to be still in the process of being added, but I don't think any amount of art passes would bring these models up to Civ6's standards--and that's a shame.
The leaders are really the biggest problem for me in VII. Even the better leaders seem underwhelming to interact with, and the worse ones are an eyesore. I really question the judgment of bringing back leaders as a fundamental mechanic of civ if this is how they were implemented (that may lessen as the full roster is revealed, but I doubt it will totally disappear). If I can somehow get over it, I will be playing with static leader screens, as the best way I can imagine to effectively play the game "without leaders." The 2D art isn't that bad (although VI's concept art blows VII out of the water on that front as well).
The industry standard is that characters are getting uglier.
Few studios are actually trying to create something inspiring, beautiful, reaching for the skies. To the contrary, they're doing the exact opposite of what historic leaders have always sought to build and depict: grandiosity, power, divine right to rule.
You should be able to navigate the diplomatic menus while the Characters talk, though, otherwise you end up constantly skipping the dialogue. Thankfully I think that's what Civ 7 is doing.
I have a feeling Firaxis will never pick a Roman Emperor who grew facial hair.....they rather the Roman leader be clean-shaven. If they picked a bearded emperor, they are afraid casuals are gonna confuse him with a Greek leader. I hope I'm proven wrong eventually, but so many great choices for a Roman leader are excluded due to their facial hair.
I have a feeling Firaxis will never pick a Roman Emperor who grew facial hair.....they rather the Roman leader be clean-shaven. If they picked a bearded emperor, they are afraid casuals are gonna confuse him with a Greek leader. I hope I'm proven wrong eventually, but so many great choices for a Roman leader are excluded due to their facial hair.
The clean-shaven look was quite distinctive of Rome (and of Sumer glares at Gilgabro), but I think Roman clothing/armor would be enough to make a bearded emperor distinctive.
There are some statues of Sumerians with beards, but the majority are beardless. (Whereas the Babylonians and Assyrians loved their glorious beards, as did their Akkadian predecessors if the Naram-sin's mask is to be believed.)
There are some statues of Sumerians with beards, but the majority are beardless. (Whereas the Babylonians and Assyrians loved their glorious beards, as did their Akkadian predecessors if the Naram-sin's mask is to be believed.)
The Sumerians had access to Obsidian traded from Anatolia and the Mediterranean, and I've always suspected that access to what amounted to blades as sharp as modern razors had something to do with the clean shaven look - when 'clean shaven' means plucking hairs out one by one or shaving with a quickly-dulled stone or copper blade, it becomes a fashion much harder to justify: Obsidian made it so much easier!
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.