Better graphic, doh!!!

[FrenchElvisl]

Look at games like Battlefield 1942, I'm sure it is very time consuming to mod graphics in that game, but people do it and do it well. Better graphics will mean it will be harder to mod them, it's true. But the truly great modders will take the time. I will stick with my beleif that a game developer should never worry about how easy their game is to mod. Laughable.

 

[Evie]

Laughable?

Perhaps for other games, but when you consider that Civ II : Conflicts in Civilizations, Civ II : Fantastic Worlds AND Civ III : Conquests were *all* based around the very ease of modding you find "laughable", it isn'T as funny anymore.

Civilization is a moddable game series. That has long been one of the series greatest' trademarks - easy to mod games, official game mods. To ruin it now in the name of flashy twelve-years-old-pleasing graphics would be to drop one of the greatest aspects of civ.

Pretty graphics won't keep a game community alive for a good eight years after its release - graphics and such will have moved on by then, and the flashy graphics you thought so cool will be dead.

The mods, on the other hand, can be a big part of doing just that, and have done it for Civilization II.

 

[h4ppy]

Please no multisquare cities, it is already hard enough to tell which side of the city rivers are on.

 

[FrenchElvisl]

I'm not saying the graphics need to be breathtaking, I'm just saying they need to improve. A little, alot, I really don't care. CivII was a big step up from CivI, Civ III was from CivII. But I personally don't mod, and if a knew a game developer could have mad an improvement but did not for the sole reason that their game would be easier to mod I would be extremely pissed and so would anyone in their rightmind.

 

[Evie]

I'm not saying no graphics improvements, of course. I'm saying, keep it simple still. IE, no unneeded animated terrain and such.

Civilization without the modding community loses a lot of value.

 

[FrenchElvisl]

I understand that the modding community is very important. I just think that ease of modding should not be the driving force behind how they design the graphics. All I want is the graphics to be improved, I don't want the game to look like UT2k4, or any of those fancy games, but I just want it to be the next step above Civ3, keeping with the whole 2D thing is alright.

 

[micmc]

I liked the metaphore that the "milk" was more like glittery glue, though I tend to think its a lot more dangerous. The entire world is giving into flash over substance, this is nuthin' new, lets face it every indigenous people who ain't no longer indingous to where they once lived, lost their land cuz of bright shiney stuff.

It wasn't plauge, guns or killing the bison that destroyed the first americans it was the fact every simple people (read that as spiritualy connected to the land more than their own greed) wanted things to be easier with the benifits of civilization. The selling point was glass beads & brass nails and too many folks decided pretty was so much better than worthwhile they sold each other out to be more like the invader.

Before I get guff about singling out the first americans...it's happened to every tribal people in every land in every time of history...the franks fell for it with the romans...the saxons/germans/all them people fell for it so much they went and sacked rome to get more glittery stuff of their own.

We become what we fight against.

Nice graphics in a game are nice. If it means sacrificing playablity or interesting features of gameplay then I'd rather have the Black Hills than all the shiney beads in the trader's box.

A comic talked about 70% people worry about how something looks, only 10% worry about what is being said...and I suspect those numbers are truer than I want them to be. The entire gaming industry is geared to High Flash graphics which take your breath away and all the replay value of the average dead skunk. Can't we have one place which still holds sacred the values of chess and go in a modern game? Do we really have to give into the lapdance mentality of pretty pictures in total?

I understand the industry is in it to make money...and if any industry made a non-breakable product, they'd only ever sell 1 per person and go broke. I respect the need to stay competive with the mario-morons and provide higher flash at the cost of something more long lasting.

But Civ is it. There ain't other games out there striving for the perfection of the mind over the perfection of the hand (to eye corridination) Sid M. did something remarkable 20 years ago, he made us gods, and ain't it a shame even little lone gods playing on their magic boxes want to be entertained by electron rather than what their own mind may wrought.

 

[Blasphemous]

Right on target micmc!

 

[EddyG17]

The reason I brough Civ3 was because it look so damn cool.
I bet the moders would love better graphics because it would mean the they can put as much detail in their work as they want.
with better graphics you could make better looking mods, and if it is too much work for you, you can always move down the ladder.

 

[judgement]

Originally posted by EddyG17
I bet the moders would love better graphics because it would mean the they can put as much detail in their work as they want.
with better graphics you could make better looking mods, and if it is too much work for you, you can always move down the ladder.

I suppose there is a critical point being made here: better graphics do not always make things worse for modders. So the important thing is that Civ 4 avoid a graphics engine that is difficult for modders to add things to (I fear fully 3D graphics would be in this category). As long as new units, improvements, etc. are easy to add, EddyG17 is right, many modders might appreciate a broader canvas for their art, so to speak.

 

[micmc]

some of the mod stuff I've seen, the orginal stuff, is incredible. It doesn't seem like the powers that be want to make something impossible to create within for the average (or more than average talented artist types) player. I can't believe their marketing people would let them....if nothing else the sims showed the fun can be in making your own stuff...and I'm all for good graphic changes within the player community.

Which would allow the designers to focus on game depth and ease-of-use. Which would keep just about everybody happy.

 

[Jon Shafer]

PLEASE no 3D map or anything like that!

Spend time coding the AI or new game concepts, not worrying about making 3D Civ!

 

[Chieftess]

I'd rather have a game with a great AI and nice concepts too, rather than a game that looks pretty, but is unplayable. Leave it up to the artists, and the modding community to make great graphics.

 

[capslock]

Originally posted by Trip
PLEASE no 3D map or anything like that!

Spend time coding the AI or new game concepts, not worrying about making 3D Civ!

I second that. And multiplayer, too. Lets have that the first time around this time.

 

[Evie]

I third (or is that fourth by now?) Trip, Chieftess and capslock's position.

AI and game concepts first, art *very much* later. Civ I, II and III have been great games despite having average graphics at best each in turn - and they *lasted* as great games, because the gameplay and concepts were great.

Let's keep that notion of gameplay and concepts first, art later at the forefront of the design for the next generation.

 

[Pirate]

Personally I don't really mod my game and really want to buy a game with nice graphics. I might, but I appreciate great graphics in a game.

The only thing I worry about is that the code would be rushed so a great game with great graphics would become unplayable like the SimCity4 fiasco.

I'll wait for the great graphics, but I really do appreciate them once I have them.

 

[EddyG17]

The next generation is Civ 4.
Better looking graphics will make the game more appeapling to new costumers and make existing costumers more "loyal" to the game. I think that pretty much every one of us would buy Civ4 regardless of how it looks, but for Atari to get more sales the game will need a make over. Don't judge a game for it cover, but that is the way it is done.

 

[Kaboth]

Look at games like Battlefield 1942, I'm sure it is very time consuming to mod graphics in that game, but people do it and do it well. Better graphics will mean it will be harder to mod them, it's true. But the truly great modders will take the time. I will stick with my beleif that a game developer should never worry about how easy their game is to mod. Laughable.

Have you considered the size of the audience who plays BF 1942 it is a helluva lot larger than those who play Civ + Those who play civ are generally older (more work = less time) and BF1942 is a game people play professionally, so mods are far more important as that is their day job playing games. We are fortunate the amound of mods we get for civ considering the size of the community. You don't want to hinder this. As for game developers not making games easy to mod, this is a huge selling point these days and is a primary reason PC software is still alive and consoles havn't entirely taken over the world. Because console games can't really be modded. Developers don't always have time to make something perfect and what people want from their game differs from person to person; through modding everyone can get everything they want out of their game.

As for improving graphics. I think integrating terrain elevation needs to be considered. But I don't want it to end up like smac where the power of the different levels of terrain is very difficult to understand. 2D is fine though I think people will improve their comps before civ4 is released and certainly adding higher resolution support is necessary + more detailed graphics. The main processing of civ goes into turn management I doubt adding better looking 2D graphics will affect the speed much, but I'm no expert.

 

[wlievens]

Civ3's graphics are enough, for me.

 

[wlievens]

If downgrading the graphics will be make the game run better, I'm for it.