Caricaturized leaders in the game...

[darko82]

I should have worded the poll like this.

"Do you prefer realistic leaders in the game? or"
"Do you prefer caricaturized leaders in the game?"

Answers:

"I prefer realistic leaders in the game"
"I prefer caricaturized leaders in the game"
"I don't care"
"Other"

 

[gfeier]

It's appropriate for a game with "big personality" leaders. Pedro and Monty could use a bit more work, though.

 

[Jaaboo]

Ugh, what a crap poll. You ask, "Do you like the 'caricaturized'[sic] leaders" and then your "Yes" option is disliking the new leader animations. That's incredibly misleading.

 

[DeutschDachs]

I'm fine with either so long as the caricatures make you think of the leader in question.

Like old Teddy looked more like Taft so I didn't like it. Now he almost looks too realistic compared to the other leaders

 

[lorrydriverjr]

I do care, but I'm fine with either as long as they're done well. What should I vote?

 

[PetrusvonDoom]

I like both styles, but i guess that a "half-term" would be better...
Anyway, the civ vi leaders looks very charismatics to me.

 

[King Jason]

In reality I don't really care but I voted caricature because realistic easily has the potential to either look like crap, or be incredibly boring. I was initially a fan of the art direction of civ5 but after putting many hours into the game, and perhaps augmented by my biased against a handful of different things about the game, overall I thought the aesthetic of that game was just incredibly dull - right down to it's color palette. Many of the leaders were just absolute bores. Elizabeth, Ramses, Washington, Bismarck, Harun Al-Rashid... All of them just lifeless husks. Harold Bluetooth is the only I can think of of the top of my head that had any personality to him.

I ultimately turned off leader animations because most of them might as well had been portraits anyway.

 

[Ryika]

In Civ VI they fit very well in my opinion and so far have shown a lot of character.

 

[SMcM]

Do you like caricaturized leaders in the game or would you prefer standard looking (more realistic) versions?

Well, charicature isn't an accurate description. Charicatures a have exaggerated features, not entirely new ones, as is the case for the old version of Teddy Roosevelt, as well as for Victoria, Catherine De Medicis, Qin Shi Huang. But, anyway, besides the old Teddy, and to and Victoria, I don't mind this style.

Anyway, to be honest, what bothers me the most (now that walrus Teddy is no more) is the backgrounds. I sort of appreciate them because they should make leaderscene backgrounds easier, and possibly more enjoyable, for the modding community to make, and some of them look quite nice, but I preferred the dynamic leader backgrounds from Civ 5, particlarly the ones for Montezuma, Harald, Nebuchadnezzar, Askia and Gustavus.

Overall though, I probably preferred the Civ 5 style, but I suppose a change was needed. Off course, when it comes to Civ VII, we'll probably have an entirely new style altogether.

 

[CaiusDrewart]

I think either a cartoony or a realistic aesthetic is perfectly fine, so long as it is done well. Civ VI has been vastly more successful in implementing playful caricatures than Civ IV was (so many of the leaders in that game look like horrible stereotypes--poor Suryavarman!)

 

[SMcM]

I think either a cartoony or a realistic aesthetic is perfectly fine, so long as it is done well. Civ VI has been vastly more successful in implementing playful caricatures than Civ IV was (so many of the leaders in that game look like horrible stereotypes--poor Suryavarman!)

What Asian stereotype did Suryavaryman resemble? Something racist like yellow skin? I remember people used to call him 'lizard man' because his skeen was almost green, so even if it was intended to appear as a racist stereotype, it actually ended up looking even more bizarre!👹

 

[Lucius_]

Not a fan of the poll, but I voted I don't care. What I mean is, the leaders as they are fit the art style of the game. That said, some of the exaggerations I think are ridiculous, like Teddy's old weight and Cleopatra's lips and breasts come across as unrealistic. Without some push-up action going on, breasts that size shouldn't have that deep cleavage like that and just doesn't feel representative of someone from 2000 years ago.

 

[Dark_Jedi06]

The leader screens in Civ have always been somewhat exaggerated and interpretative; Civ V is really the outlier in that regard. As it stands now, Civ VI is really striking a great balance between realistic and artistic and I've been thoroughly impressed by all of the leader screens, I'm particularly fond of Tomyris and Qin Shi Huang.

 

[thecrazyscot]

I like the cartoony look of the leaders especially because it fits very nicely with the overall art theme. A unified art style is very important.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G900A using Tapatalk

 

[Monado]

I really dislike the civ 5 leaderscreens.

Atleast they made an attempt to fix the needlessly obese Roosevelt a bit. Maybe they'll give that treatment to a few more leaders who need it.

 

[rastak]

I really dislike the civ 5 leaderscreens.

Atleast they made an attempt to fix the needlessly obese Roosevelt a bit. Maybe they'll give that treatment to a few more leaders who need it.

How do you feel about Civ 6? You already referenced Roosevelt so your reply is a mixed bag.

 

[Thormodr]

Caricaturized leaders are fine. They were just fine in cIV and they are fine in Civ VI.

 

[Sobornost]

I like them overall, no better or worse than any other game in the end. Tomyris I thought was particularly well-done.

 

[Aristos]

If they are diverting the big savings in leader screen development to AI development, I love the cartoons!

If not, then I don't care because we may have BE round 2.

 

[Atlas627]

This poll is very unfairly worded.

I like the Civ6 art. I liked the Civ5 art. I like the Civ6 art better.